PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RLY vs. LCTU
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RLY vs. LCTU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF (RLY) and BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RLY achieves a 17.13% return, which is significantly higher than LCTU's 9.04% return.


RLY

1D
-0.30%
1M
-0.30%
YTD
17.13%
6M
18.27%
1Y
31.78%
3Y*
15.11%
5Y*
10.43%
10Y*
8.56%

LCTU

1D
-0.74%
1M
5.23%
YTD
9.04%
6M
9.21%
1Y
25.72%
3Y*
21.17%
5Y*
12.37%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RLY vs. LCTU - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
RLY
SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF
17.13%20.26%2.53%2.56%7.86%12.05%
LCTU
BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF
9.04%16.96%24.00%25.38%-20.02%17.49%

Correlation

The correlation between RLY and LCTU is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.29

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.44

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.54

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 9, 2021

0.54

Over the past year, the correlation between RLY and LCTU has dropped to 0.29 - well below their long-term average of 0.54, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

RLY vs. LCTU - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RLY
LCTU

Energy

30.1%
3.5%

Basic Materials

25.1%
1.9%

Industrials

16.5%
8.7%

Utilities

15.9%
2.5%

Real Estate

5.4%
2.5%

Consumer Defensive

3.6%
4.9%

Consumer Cyclical

2.6%
10.3%

Healthcare

0.8%
8.8%

Financial Services

0.0%
12.1%

Communication Services

-

10.3%

Technology

-

34.6%

Energy

RLY
30.1%
LCTU
3.5%

Basic Materials

RLY
25.1%
LCTU
1.9%

Industrials

RLY
16.5%
LCTU
8.7%

Utilities

RLY
15.9%
LCTU
2.5%

Real Estate

RLY
5.4%
LCTU
2.5%

Consumer Defensive

RLY
3.6%
LCTU
4.9%

Consumer Cyclical

RLY
2.6%
LCTU
10.3%

Healthcare

RLY
0.8%
LCTU
8.8%

Financial Services

RLY
0.0%
LCTU
12.1%

Communication Services

RLY

-

LCTU
10.3%

Technology

RLY

-

LCTU
34.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

RLY vs. LCTU — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

RLY
RLY Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
RLY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RLY Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
RLY Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
RLY Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
RLY Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank

LCTU
LCTU Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
LCTU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LCTU Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
LCTU Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
LCTU Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
LCTU Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

RLY vs. LCTU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF (RLY) and BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTU). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


RLYLCTUDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.44

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.60

1.38

+0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

8.60

2.75

+5.84

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

31.17

12.25

+18.92

RLY vs. LCTU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RLY Sharpe Ratio is 3.17, which is higher than the LCTU Sharpe Ratio of 2.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RLY and LCTU, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


RLYLCTUDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.17

2.10

+1.07

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.77

0.72

+0.05

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.62

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.38

0.76

-0.38

Drawdowns

RLY vs. LCTU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RLY drawdown since its inception was -37.75%, which is greater than LCTU's maximum drawdown of -25.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RLY and LCTU.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RLYLCTUDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-37.75%

-25.93%

-11.82%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.71%

-9.38%

+5.67%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.08%

-19.83%

+9.75%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.94%

-25.93%

+6.99%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.17%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.60%

-0.74%

-0.86%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.46%

-6.32%

-3.14%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.02%

2.11%

-1.09%

Volatility

RLY vs. LCTU - Volatility Comparison

SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF (RLY) and BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTU) have volatilities of 3.00% and 3.04%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RLYLCTUDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.00%

3.04%

-0.04%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.15%

9.36%

-1.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.06%

12.30%

-2.24%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.54%

17.15%

-3.61%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.81%

17.02%

-3.21%

RLY vs. LCTU - Expense Ratio Comparison

RLY has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than LCTU's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

RLY vs. LCTU - Dividend Comparison

RLY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.86%, more than LCTU's 0.93% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
LCTU
BlackRock U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF
0.93%1.02%1.27%1.46%1.63%2.20%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RLY
SPDR SSgA Multi-Asset Real Return ETF
2.86%3.24%3.31%3.71%5.66%12.15%2.16%3.45%2.76%1.85%2.07%1.80%

Frequently Asked Questions


RLY and LCTU have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LCTU has higher volatility (3.04%) compared to RLY (3.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RLY dropped -37.75% vs LCTU's -25.93%.

On 5-year performance, LCTU leads with 12.37% vs 10.43% for RLY. On fees, LCTU is cheaper at 0.15% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, LCTU has performed better with a 12.37% return vs 10.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LCTU is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for RLY.

RLY has the higher dividend yield at 2.86%, compared with 0.93% for LCTU.

RLY is categorized as Hedge Fund, while LCTU is ESG. They also come from different issuers: State Street and BlackRock. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for RLY and 0.15% for LCTU.

RLY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.17 vs 2.10), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RLY and LCTU

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer