Data as of Nov 4, 2026.
AOTG vs LFSC: Holdings Overlap & Returns
Over the year to Nov 4, 2026, AOTG returned +3.2% to LFSC's +43.6%; 0% of their weight is in the same names.
askIQ about this page
askIQ about AOTG and LFSC
Net assets on Aug 31, 2026: $105m for AOT Growth and Innovation ETF and $126m for F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF.
74% of AOTG's weight is in S&P 500 companies and 26% is outside the index. Holdings as of Aug 31, 2026.
0% of LFSC's weight is in S&P 500 companies and 100% is outside the index. Holdings as of Aug 31, 2026.
Pair scorecard
LFSC costs 0.21 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 40.4 points; LFSC is 1.2 times larger.
Points (pts) are percentage points.
| Measure | AOTG | LFSC |
|---|---|---|
| Return | ||
| Total return, 1 year | +3.2% | +43.6% |
| Drawdown | ||
| Below its all-time high | 14.7%, high on Oct 7, 2026 | 5.7%, high on Aug 19, 2026 |
| Against its benchmark | ||
| What it tracks | Broad innovation and megatrends | Broad innovation and megatrends |
| Its benchmark, total return, 1 year | +14.4% | +14.8% |
| Against its benchmark, 1 year | behind by 11.2 pts | ahead by 28.8 pts |
| Cost and size | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.75% | 0.54% |
| Net assets, as of Aug 31, 2026 | $105m | $126m |
| Holdings | ||
| Holdings in common | 0% | |
| Top ten holdings, share of the fund | 64% | 54% |
Risk and return
Nov 8, 2024 to Oct 30, 2026 · 103 weekly returnsEach against its own benchmark: AOTG against GUSA, Jul 8, 2022 to Oct 30, 2026; LFSC against IWV, Nov 8, 2024 to Oct 30, 2026.
From Nov 2024 to Oct 2026, LFSC returned more: +61.4% to +29.8%. AOTG and LFSC swung about the same: 26.8% and 26.7%. LFSC fell slightly less at its worst: −24.4% to −26.6%.
Full scorecard
19 measures, with how each is measured Open ↓
| Measure | AOTG | LFSC | Edge | How it is measured |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Return | ||||
| Total return | +29.8% | +61.4% | LFSC | Price change plus distributions, reinvested. |
| Annualized | +14.1% | +27.3% | LFSC | Total return as a yearly rate. |
| Price return | +29.8% | +61.4% | LFSC | Price change alone, distributions left out. |
| Risk | ||||
| Volatility | 26.8% | 26.7% | Tie | Spread of weekly returns, annualized. Lower is steadier. |
| Downside deviation | 17.9% | 17.5% | LFSC (slight) | Like volatility, counting only weeks below the Treasury bill rate. |
| Max drawdown | −26.6% | −24.4% | LFSC (slight) | Deepest fall from a high to the low after it. |
| Upside capture | 213.3% | 127.3% | Share of its benchmark's rise caught in the weeks it rose. | |
| Downside capture | 136.9% | 91.1% | Share of its benchmark's fall taken in the weeks it fell. Lower is better. | |
| Beta | 1.56 | 1.09 | Not an edge | How far it moves for each 1% its benchmark moves. |
| R squared | 0.75 | 0.36 | Not an edge | Share of its weekly moves its benchmark explains. |
| Risk-adjusted | ||||
| Sharpe | 0.47 | 0.89 | LFSC | Return above Treasury bills per unit of volatility. |
| Sortino | 0.71 | 1.36 | LFSC | Return above Treasury bills per unit of downside deviation. |
| Treynor | 0.118 | 0.217 | Return above Treasury bills per unit of beta. | |
| Calmar | 0.53 | 1.12 | LFSC | Annualized return divided by the max drawdown. |
| Against the benchmark | ||||
| Benchmark | GUSA | IWV | The ETF each fund is measured against. | |
| Alpha | −2.0% a year | +13.4% a year | Not significant | Yearly return beyond what its beta to the benchmark predicts. |
| Alpha t-stat | −0.29 | 0.88 | Not an edge | How sure the alpha is. Below 2, it could be chance. |
| Alpha range | −15.4% to +11.4% | −16.9% to +43.8% | Includes zero | The 95% range for the yearly alpha. |
| Information ratio | 0.32 | 0.67 | Return against its benchmark per unit of tracking error. | |
| Tracking error | 16.5% | 21.4% | Not an edge | How far weekly returns stray from the benchmark, annualized. |
Computed by ETFIQ from Tiingo daily prices and ETFIQ's distribution records, 103 weekly returns. Cash rate: the 13-week Treasury bill.
What they share
By the books each fund has filed, AOTG and LFSC hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Aug 31, 2026.
half
0% in common
Only in one fund ↓
Window by window
| Total return | vs its benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Window | AOTG | LFSC | AOTG | LFSC |
| 3 months | −7.6% | −3.8% | −7.1 pts vs GUSA | −3.5 pts vs IWV |
| 6 months | −1.1% | +16.9% | −5.8 pts vs GUSA | +12.0 pts vs IWV |
| 1 year | +3.2% | +43.6% | −11.2 pts vs GUSA | +28.8 pts vs IWV |
| 3 years | +101.5% | – | +19.6 pts vs GUSA | – |
| Since launchNot the same days: AOTG Jun 2022 · LFSC Oct 2024 | +139.7% | +83.4% | +29.2 pts vs GUSA | +46.4 pts vs IWV |
– means no data for this window. Open this comparison in the app →
Side by side
As of Nov 4, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
0% of the two portfolios are the same securities at the same weight.
Client brief:
The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.
Over the year to Nov 4, 2026 the fund returned +3.2% with distributions reinvested against +14.4% for its benchmark, the Solactive GBS United States 1000 Index, so a holder was behind by 11.2 pts.
By weight, 74% of AOTG's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 69%. The top ten holdings are 64% of the fund across 43 positions, as filed for Aug 31, 2026. It sits 14.7% below its all-time high of Oct 7, 2026.
Over the year to Nov 4, 2026 the fund returned +43.6% with distributions reinvested against +14.8% for its benchmark, the Russell 3000 Total Return, so a holder was ahead by 28.8 pts.
By weight, 0% of LFSC's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 100%. The top ten holdings are 54% of the fund across 38 positions, as filed for Aug 31, 2026. It sits 5.7% below its all-time high of Aug 19, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Do AOTG and LFSC hold the same stocks?
- By their latest filings, 0% of their books are the same securities at the same weight. Overlap is the sum of the smaller weight of every security they share.
Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.
How this is computed
Overlap adds up the smaller of the two weights for each security both funds hold.
Every number is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested.
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown
ETFIQ, AOTG against LFSC, data as of Nov 4, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/aotg-vs-lfsc
ETFIQ. (Nov 4, 2026). AOTG against LFSC. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/aotg-vs-lfsc
[AOTG against LFSC (ETFIQ, Nov 4, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/themes/aotg-vs-lfsc)
Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.