Screener
CHPX vs LRNZ
Global X AI Semiconductor & Quantum ETF vs TrueShares Technology, AI and Deep Learning ETF
Key differences
- CHPX costs 0.19% less per year.
- CHPX follows a index tracking strategy; LRNZ uses active selection.
- LRNZ has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| CHPX | LRNZ | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.50% | 0.69% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $40M | $31M |
| Since | 2025 | 2020 |
| Dividend yield | — | 0.00% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | — | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | active selection |
| CAGR 1Y | N/A | +35.9% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | +24.9% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +7.3% |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | 0.77 |
| Volatility 1Y | — | 27.41% |
| Max drawdown | -15.15% | -61.33% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to CHPX and LRNZ
Explore further