XLF vs. LRCX

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

XLF (State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF) is Financials Equities fund tracking the Financial Select Sector Index, while LRCX (Lam Research Corporation) is a stock. Over the past 10 years, XLF returned 12.79%/yr vs 46.35%/yr for LRCX. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

XLF vs. LRCX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) and Lam Research Corporation (LRCX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XLF achieves a -4.62% return, which is significantly lower than LRCX's 89.76% return. Over the past 10 years, XLF has underperformed LRCX with an annualized return of 12.79%, while LRCX has yielded a comparatively higher 46.35% annualized return.

XLF

• 1D: -0.63%
• 1M: 1.42%
• YTD: -4.62%
• 6M: -1.98%
• 1Y: 2.91%
• 3Y*: 18.06%
• 5Y*: 8.47%
• 10Y*: 12.79%

LRCX

• 1D: 6.98%
• 1M: 10.34%
• YTD: 89.76%
• 6M: 99.61%
• 1Y: 278.49%
• 3Y*: 76.58%
• 5Y*: 40.10%
• 10Y*: 46.35%

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

XLF vs. LRCX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF	-4.62%	14.90%	30.56%	12.03%	-10.59%	34.80%	-1.74%	31.88%	-13.06%	22.00%
LRCX Lam Research Corporation	89.76%	139.16%	-6.84%	88.63%	-40.72%	53.66%	64.18%	119.33%	-24.40%	76.21%

Correlation

The correlation between XLF and LRCX is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.24
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.28
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.41
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 23, 1998	0.45

Over the past year, the correlation between XLF and LRCX has dropped to 0.24 - well below their long-term average of 0.45, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

XLF vs. LRCX — Risk / Return Rank

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

XLF

XLF Risk / Return Rank: 12
XLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 12
XLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
XLF Omega Ratio Rank: 12
XLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
XLF Martin Ratio Rank: 12

LRCX

LRCX Risk / Return Rank: 98
LRCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
LRCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
LRCX Omega Ratio Rank: 96
LRCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
LRCX Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

XLF vs. LRCX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) and Lam Research Corporation (LRCX). 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.

	XLF	LRCX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.20	5.46	-5.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.37	4.54	-4.17
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.05	1.60	-0.56
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.20	14.02	-13.82
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.51	47.19	-46.67
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XLF vs. LRCX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLF Sharpe Ratio is 0.20, which is lower than the LRCX Sharpe Ratio of 5.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLF and LRCX, 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

	XLF	LRCX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.20	5.46	-5.26
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.46	0.87	-0.42
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.58	1.04	-0.46
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.21	0.43	-0.23

Drawdowns

XLF vs. LRCX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLF drawdown since its inception was -82.69%, smaller than the maximum LRCX drawdown of -87.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLF and LRCX.

Drawdown Indicators

	XLF	LRCX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-82.69%	-87.90%	+5.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.79%	-20.01%	+5.22%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.54%	-47.10%	+31.56%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.81%	-56.39%	+30.58%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-42.86%	-56.39%	+13.53%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.38%	-5.60%	-1.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.02%	-28.18%	+8.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.71%	5.93%	-0.22%

Volatility

XLF vs. LRCX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) is 4.20%, while Lam Research Corporation (LRCX) has a volatility of 18.51%. This indicates that XLF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LRCX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XLF	LRCX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.20%	18.51%	-14.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.18%	42.13%	-30.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.61%	51.52%	-36.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.66%	46.25%	-27.59%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.18%	44.76%	-22.58%

Dividends

XLF vs. LRCX - Dividend Comparison

XLF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.52%, more than LRCX's 0.31% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
LRCX Lam Research Corporation	0.31%	0.57%	1.19%	0.95%	1.53%	0.78%	1.04%	1.54%	2.79%	1.01%	1.28%	1.36%
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF	1.52%	1.31%	1.42%	1.71%	2.04%	1.63%	2.03%	1.87%	2.08%	1.48%	21.10%	1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XLF and LRCX in my portfolio?

XLF and LRCX have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XLF or LRCX?

LRCX has higher volatility (18.51%) compared to XLF (4.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XLF dropped -82.69% vs LRCX's -87.90%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LRCX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.46 vs 0.20), 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.