XLB vs. ION

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

XLB (Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF) and ION (Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XLB is a Materials fund tracking the Materials Select Sector Index, while ION is a Lithium & Battery Metals fund tracking the S&P Global Core Battery Metals Index - Benchmark TR Net. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XLB returned 10.88%/yr vs 17.31%/yr for ION. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XLB charges 0.13%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for ION.

Performance

XLB vs. ION - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLB) and Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF (ION). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XLB achieves a 15.57% return, which is significantly higher than ION's 13.12% return.

XLB

• 1D: 1.87%
• 1M: 3.74%
• YTD: 15.57%
• 6M: 16.68%
• 1Y: 21.77%
• 3Y*: 10.88%
• 5Y*: 6.01%
• 10Y*: 10.54%

ION

• 1D: 4.15%
• 1M: -8.49%
• YTD: 13.12%
• 6M: 23.38%
• 1Y: 112.30%
• 3Y*: 17.31%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XLB vs. ION - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
XLB Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF	15.57%	9.94%	0.15%	12.46%	-5.52%
ION Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF	13.12%	108.37%	-20.02%	-14.10%	-8.45%

Correlation

The correlation between XLB and ION is 0.55, 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	0.55
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 1, 2022	0.57

The correlation between XLB and ION has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

XLB vs. ION - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XLB	ION
Basic Materials	87.3%	13.7%
Consumer Cyclical	12.7%	-
Industrials	1.5%	1.7%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	2.3%
Financial Services	-	13.0%
Healthcare	-	1.7%
Real Estate	-	2.3%
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

XLB vs. ION — Risk / Return Rank

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

XLB

XLB Risk / Return Rank: 37
XLB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
XLB Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
XLB Omega Ratio Rank: 34
XLB Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
XLB Martin Ratio Rank: 37

ION

ION Risk / Return Rank: 84
ION Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
ION Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
ION Omega Ratio Rank: 78
ION Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
ION Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

XLB vs. ION - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLB) and Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF (ION). 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.

	XLB	ION	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.17	2.81	-1.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.73	3.09	-1.35
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.40	-0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.65	4.74	-3.09
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.05	15.01	-9.95

XLB vs. ION - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLB Sharpe Ratio is 1.17, which is lower than the ION Sharpe Ratio of 2.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLB and ION, 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

XLB vs. ION - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLB drawdown since its inception was -59.83%, which is greater than ION's maximum drawdown of -52.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLB and ION.

Drawdown Indicators

	XLB	ION	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.83%	-52.08%	-7.75%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.38%	-23.30%	+10.92%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.17%	-46.47%	+23.30%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.72%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-37.27%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.25%	-14.68%	+12.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.83%	-23.64%	+12.81%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.04%	7.34%	-3.30%

Volatility

XLB vs. ION - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLB) is 7.05%, while Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF (ION) has a volatility of 15.42%. This indicates that XLB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ION based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XLB	ION	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.05%	15.42%	-8.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.58%	31.74%	-18.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.49%	39.38%	-21.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.06%	31.51%	-12.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.70%	31.51%	-10.81%

XLB vs. ION - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLB has a 0.13% expense ratio, which is lower than ION's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

XLB vs. ION - Dividend Comparison

XLB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.68%, more than ION's 1.41% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ION Proshares S&P Global Core Battery Metals ETF	1.41%	1.63%	1.74%	2.23%	0.13%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XLB Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF	1.68%	1.92%	1.92%	2.00%	2.26%	1.62%	1.72%	1.98%	2.20%	1.66%	1.95%	2.24%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XLB and ION in my portfolio?

XLB and ION have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XLB or ION?

ION has higher volatility (15.42%) compared to XLB (7.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XLB dropped -59.83% vs ION's -52.08%.

Which ETF is better, XLB or ION?

On 3-year performance, ION leads with 17.31% vs 10.88% for XLB. On fees, XLB is cheaper at 0.13% per year. On volatility, XLB has been the lower-risk option at 7.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XLB or ION?

Over the 3-year period, ION has performed better with a 17.31% return vs 10.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XLB or ION?

XLB is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for ION.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XLB or ION?

XLB has the higher dividend yield at 1.68%, compared with 1.41% for ION.

What is the main difference between XLB and ION?

XLB is categorized as Materials, while ION is Lithium & Battery Metals. XLB tracks Materials Select Sector Index, while ION tracks S&P Global Core Battery Metals Index - Benchmark TR Net. They also come from different issuers: State Street and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.13% for XLB and 0.58% for ION.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ION currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.81 vs 1.17), 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.