SCLZ vs. LQTI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SCLZ (Swan Enhanced Dividend Income ETF) and LQTI (FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF) are both Derivative Income funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, SCLZ returned 16.69% vs 5.69% for LQTI. At a 0.29 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SCLZ charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for LQTI.

Performance

SCLZ vs. LQTI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Swan Enhanced Dividend Income ETF (SCLZ) and FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SCLZ achieves a 6.46% return, which is significantly higher than LQTI's 0.16% return.

SCLZ

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 2.97%
• YTD: 6.46%
• 6M: 7.49%
• 1Y: 16.69%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LQTI

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: 0.41%
• YTD: 0.16%
• 6M: -0.04%
• 1Y: 5.69%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SCLZ vs. LQTI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
SCLZ Swan Enhanced Dividend Income ETF	6.46%	7.54%
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF	0.16%	6.69%

Correlation

The correlation between SCLZ and LQTI is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.30
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2025	0.29

Return for Risk

SCLZ vs. LQTI — Risk / Return Rank

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

SCLZ

SCLZ Risk / Return Rank: 57
SCLZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
SCLZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
SCLZ Omega Ratio Rank: 58
SCLZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
SCLZ Martin Ratio Rank: 65

LQTI

LQTI Risk / Return Rank: 32
LQTI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
LQTI Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
LQTI Omega Ratio Rank: 29
LQTI Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
LQTI Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

SCLZ vs. LQTI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Swan Enhanced Dividend Income ETF (SCLZ) and FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI). 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.

	SCLZ	LQTI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.84	1.12	+0.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.62	1.64	+0.99
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.19	+0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.40	1.68	+0.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.60	5.15	+6.46
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SCLZ vs. LQTI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SCLZ Sharpe Ratio is 1.84, which is higher than the LQTI Sharpe Ratio of 1.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SCLZ and LQTI, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	SCLZ	LQTI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.84	1.12	+0.72
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.17	0.88	+0.28

Drawdowns

SCLZ vs. LQTI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SCLZ drawdown since its inception was -12.58%, which is greater than LQTI's maximum drawdown of -3.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCLZ and LQTI.

Drawdown Indicators

	SCLZ	LQTI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.58%	-3.41%	-9.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.00%	-3.41%	-3.59%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.23%	-1.44%	+1.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.37%	-0.88%	-0.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.44%	1.11%	+0.33%

Volatility

SCLZ vs. LQTI - Volatility Comparison

Swan Enhanced Dividend Income ETF (SCLZ) and FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF (LQTI) have volatilities of 1.62% and 1.65%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	SCLZ	LQTI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.62%	1.65%	-0.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.38%	4.02%	+3.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.13%	5.10%	+4.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.35%	5.97%	+5.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.35%	5.97%	+5.38%

SCLZ vs. LQTI - Expense Ratio Comparison

SCLZ has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than LQTI's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

SCLZ vs. LQTI - Dividend Comparison

SCLZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.15%, which matches LQTI's 9.11% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
LQTI FT Vest Investment Grade & Target Income ETF	9.11%	7.01%	0.00%
SCLZ Swan Enhanced Dividend Income ETF	9.15%	7.53%	4.86%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SCLZ and LQTI in my portfolio?

SCLZ and LQTI have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SCLZ or LQTI?

LQTI has higher volatility (1.65%) compared to SCLZ (1.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SCLZ dropped -12.58% vs LQTI's -3.41%.

Which ETF is better, SCLZ or LQTI?

On 1-year performance, SCLZ leads with 16.69% vs 5.69% for LQTI. On fees, LQTI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SCLZ or LQTI?

Over the 1-year period, SCLZ has performed better with a 16.69% return vs 5.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SCLZ or LQTI?

LQTI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for SCLZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SCLZ or LQTI?

SCLZ has the higher dividend yield at 9.15%, compared with 9.11% for LQTI.

What is the main difference between SCLZ and LQTI?

They also come from different issuers: Swan and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for SCLZ and 0.65% for LQTI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SCLZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.84 vs 1.12), 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.