PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SDG vs. LCTD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

SDG vs. LCTD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Global Sustainable Development Goals ETF (SDG) and BlackRock World ex U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with SDG having a 7.33% return and LCTD slightly higher at 7.66%.


SDG

1D
0.08%
1M
-0.84%
YTD
7.33%
6M
7.12%
1Y
23.73%
3Y*
7.07%
5Y*
0.09%
10Y*
8.80%

LCTD

1D
0.05%
1M
0.97%
YTD
7.66%
6M
7.73%
1Y
22.12%
3Y*
15.68%
5Y*
7.39%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SDG vs. LCTD - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
SDG
iShares MSCI Global Sustainable Development Goals ETF
7.33%20.19%-10.09%4.59%-11.51%-3.08%
LCTD
BlackRock World ex U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF
7.66%30.42%3.14%17.10%-16.16%4.48%

Correlation

The correlation between SDG and LCTD is 0.77, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.77

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

0.78

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

0.82

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 8, 2021

0.82

The correlation between SDG and LCTD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

SDG vs. LCTD — Risk / Return Rank

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

SDG
SDG Risk / Return Rank: 5151
Overall Rank
SDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4646
Sortino Ratio Rank
SDG Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
SDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
SDG Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank

LCTD
LCTD Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
LCTD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LCTD Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
LCTD Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
LCTD Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
LCTD Martin Ratio Rank: 4545
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.

SDG vs. LCTD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Global Sustainable Development Goals ETF (SDG) and BlackRock World ex U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTD). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


SDGLCTDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.11

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.12

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.27

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.75

2.03

+0.71

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.88

7.16

+2.72

SDG vs. LCTD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SDG Sharpe Ratio is 1.60, which is comparable to the LCTD Sharpe Ratio of 1.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SDG and LCTD, 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...

Drawdowns

SDG vs. LCTD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SDG drawdown since its inception was -30.35%, roughly equal to the maximum LCTD drawdown of -29.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SDG and LCTD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SDGLCTDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.35%

-29.82%

-0.53%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.68%

-10.92%

+2.24%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.92%

-13.59%

-9.33%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-30.35%

-29.82%

-0.53%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.95%

-2.02%

-0.93%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.63%

-6.76%

-2.87%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.41%

3.10%

-0.69%

Volatility

SDG vs. LCTD - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Global Sustainable Development Goals ETF (SDG) has a higher volatility of 5.68% compared to BlackRock World ex U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF (LCTD) at 4.38%. This indicates that SDG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LCTD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SDGLCTDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.68%

4.38%

+1.30%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.87%

12.51%

-0.64%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.92%

14.92%

0.00%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.76%

16.20%

-0.44%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.71%

16.08%

+0.63%

SDG vs. LCTD - Expense Ratio Comparison

SDG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than LCTD's 0.20% expense ratio.


Dividends

SDG vs. LCTD - Dividend Comparison

SDG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.69%, less than LCTD's 3.37% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
LCTD
BlackRock World ex U.S. Carbon Transition Readiness ETF
3.37%3.61%3.74%3.16%3.52%2.20%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
SDG
iShares MSCI Global Sustainable Development Goals ETF
1.69%2.00%1.95%1.77%1.82%1.66%0.97%1.39%2.47%2.54%1.34%

Frequently Asked Questions


SDG and LCTD have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SDG has higher volatility (5.68%) compared to LCTD (4.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SDG dropped -30.35% vs LCTD's -29.82%.

On 5-year performance, LCTD leads with 7.39% vs 0.09% for SDG. On fees, LCTD is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, LCTD has been the lower-risk option at 4.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, LCTD has performed better with a 7.39% return vs 0.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LCTD is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for SDG.

LCTD has the higher dividend yield at 3.37%, compared with 1.69% for SDG.

SDG is categorized as Global Equities, while LCTD is Alternative Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BlackRock. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for SDG and 0.20% for LCTD.

SDG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.60 vs 1.49), 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 SDG and LCTD

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