UX vs. LIT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

UX (Roundhill Uranium ETF) and LIT (Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF) are both Commodity Producers Equities funds. UX is actively managed, while LIT is passively managed. Over the past year, UX returned 17.18% vs 135.24% for LIT. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.75% expense ratio.

Performance

UX vs. LIT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) and Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UX achieves a -0.61% return, which is significantly lower than LIT's 30.84% return.

UX

• 1D: -2.53%
• 1M: -3.11%
• YTD: -0.61%
• 6M: 6.59%
• 1Y: 17.18%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LIT

• 1D: -1.78%
• 1M: -2.59%
• YTD: 30.84%
• 6M: 34.89%
• 1Y: 135.24%
• 3Y*: 11.20%
• 5Y*: 4.98%
• 10Y*: 14.81%

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

UX vs. LIT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
UX Roundhill Uranium ETF	-0.61%	15.76%
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF	30.84%	60.01%

Correlation

The correlation between UX and LIT is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2025	0.40

UX vs. LIT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	UX	LIT
Energy	100.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	55.4%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	7.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	26.0%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	11.5%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

UX vs. LIT — Risk / Return Rank

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

UX

UX Risk / Return Rank: 17
UX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
UX Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
UX Omega Ratio Rank: 18
UX Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
UX Martin Ratio Rank: 16

LIT

LIT Risk / Return Rank: 94
LIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
LIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
LIT Omega Ratio Rank: 90
LIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
LIT Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

UX vs. LIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) and Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT). 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.

	UX	LIT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.50	4.16	-3.66
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.93	4.45	-3.53
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	1.59	-0.48
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.73	10.37	-9.65
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.45	35.19	-33.74
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UX vs. LIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UX Sharpe Ratio is 0.50, which is lower than the LIT Sharpe Ratio of 4.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UX and LIT, 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

	UX	LIT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50	4.16	-3.66
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.16	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.48	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.31	0.27	+0.04

Drawdowns

UX vs. LIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UX drawdown since its inception was -23.72%, smaller than the maximum LIT drawdown of -65.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UX and LIT.

Drawdown Indicators

	UX	LIT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.72%	-65.91%	+42.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.72%	-13.11%	-10.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-53.01%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-65.91%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-65.91%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.59%	-8.53%	-11.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.13%	-33.63%	+23.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.87%	3.86%	+8.01%

Volatility

UX vs. LIT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) is 8.07%, while Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) has a volatility of 8.67%. This indicates that UX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UX	LIT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.07%	8.67%	-0.60%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.59%	22.00%	+2.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	34.45%	32.68%	+1.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.20%	31.83%	+4.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.20%	30.66%	+5.54%

UX vs. LIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both UX and LIT have an expense ratio of 0.75%.

Dividends

UX vs. LIT - Dividend Comparison

UX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.49%, more than LIT's 0.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
LIT Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF	0.37%	0.49%	0.93%	1.11%	0.99%	0.22%	0.40%	1.85%	2.52%	3.26%	2.15%	0.24%
UX Roundhill Uranium ETF	1.49%	1.48%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UX and LIT in my portfolio?

UX and LIT have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, UX or LIT?

LIT has higher volatility (8.67%) compared to UX (8.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UX dropped -23.72% vs LIT's -65.91%.

Which ETF is better, UX or LIT?

On 1-year performance, LIT leads with 135.24% vs 17.18% for UX. Both ETFs have the same 0.75% expense ratio. On volatility, UX has been the lower-risk option at 8.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UX or LIT?

Over the 1-year period, LIT has performed better with a 135.24% return vs 17.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UX or LIT?

UX and LIT have the same expense ratio: 0.75% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, UX or LIT?

UX has the higher dividend yield at 1.49%, compared with 0.37% for LIT.

What is the main difference between UX and LIT?

They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and Global X.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.16 vs 0.50), 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.