WDNA vs. LFSC

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

WDNA (WisdomTree BioRevolution Fund) and LFSC (F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. WDNA is passively managed, while LFSC is actively managed. Over the past year, WDNA returned 50.90% vs 75.29% for LFSC. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. WDNA charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.54%/yr for LFSC.

Performance

WDNA vs. LFSC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WisdomTree BioRevolution Fund (WDNA) and F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WDNA achieves a 13.32% return, which is significantly lower than LFSC's 16.36% return.

WDNA

• 1D: 0.49%
• 1M: 8.93%
• YTD: 13.32%
• 6M: 11.11%
• 1Y: 50.90%
• 3Y*: 5.47%
• 5Y*: -5.03%
• 10Y*: —

LFSC

• 1D: 0.52%
• 1M: 11.21%
• YTD: 16.36%
• 6M: 9.80%
• 1Y: 75.29%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

WDNA vs. LFSC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
WDNA WisdomTree BioRevolution Fund	13.32%	22.68%	-8.40%
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF	16.36%	56.54%	-6.51%

Correlation

The correlation between WDNA and LFSC is 0.73, 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	0.73
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 31, 2024	0.76

The correlation between WDNA and LFSC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

WDNA vs. LFSC — Risk / Return Rank

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

WDNA

WDNA Risk / Return Rank: 66
WDNA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
WDNA Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
WDNA Omega Ratio Rank: 56
WDNA Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
WDNA Martin Ratio Rank: 59

LFSC

LFSC Risk / Return Rank: 85
LFSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
LFSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
LFSC Omega Ratio Rank: 83
LFSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
LFSC Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

WDNA vs. LFSC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WisdomTree BioRevolution Fund (WDNA) and F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC). 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.

	WDNA	LFSC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.98	2.85	-0.87
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.81	3.79	-0.98
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.45	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.37	4.66	-0.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.80	13.00	-3.20

WDNA vs. LFSC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WDNA Sharpe Ratio is 1.98, which is lower than the LFSC Sharpe Ratio of 2.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WDNA and LFSC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

WDNA vs. LFSC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WDNA drawdown since its inception was -58.87%, which is greater than LFSC's maximum drawdown of -29.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WDNA and LFSC.

Drawdown Indicators

	WDNA	LFSC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.87%	-29.74%	-29.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.70%	-16.25%	+4.55%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-38.25%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-58.87%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-27.05%	0.00%	-27.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-35.56%	-7.58%	-27.98%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.21%	5.81%	-0.60%

Volatility

WDNA vs. LFSC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for WisdomTree BioRevolution Fund (WDNA) is 7.39%, while F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) has a volatility of 7.86%. This indicates that WDNA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LFSC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	WDNA	LFSC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.39%	7.86%	-0.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.98%	18.94%	-1.96%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.90%	26.56%	-0.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.14%	28.90%	-3.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.06%	28.90%	-3.84%

WDNA vs. LFSC - Expense Ratio Comparison

WDNA has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than LFSC's 0.54% expense ratio.

Dividends

WDNA vs. LFSC - Dividend Comparison

WDNA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.03%, while LFSC has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
WDNA WisdomTree BioRevolution Fund	4.03%	4.57%	0.75%	0.80%	0.38%	0.10%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both WDNA and LFSC in my portfolio?

WDNA and LFSC have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, WDNA or LFSC?

LFSC has higher volatility (7.86%) compared to WDNA (7.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WDNA dropped -58.87% vs LFSC's -29.74%.

Which ETF is better, WDNA or LFSC?

On 1-year performance, LFSC leads with 75.29% vs 50.90% for WDNA. On fees, WDNA is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, WDNA has been the lower-risk option at 7.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, WDNA or LFSC?

Over the 1-year period, LFSC has performed better with a 75.29% return vs 50.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, WDNA or LFSC?

WDNA is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.54% for LFSC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, WDNA or LFSC?

WDNA has the higher dividend yield at 4.03%, compared with 0.00% for LFSC.

What is the main difference between WDNA and LFSC?

They also come from different issuers: WisdomTree and F/m Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for WDNA and 0.54% for LFSC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LFSC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.85 vs 1.98), 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.