EART ranks 2nd and LITP 11th of 12 funds in the Critical Materials Category.
EART vs LITP
EART −0.06pt a year
0.59%0.65%
LITP 2.2×the volume
17.1K37.3K
EART vs LITP Performance
−16.3%−33.2%
- EART 0.59%, better
- LITP 0.65%
- EART $41M
- LITP $26M
- EART
- LITP −14.5%
- EART 0.74%
- LITP 11.95%, better
- EART 51
- LITP 39
- EART 17.1K sh
- LITP 37.3K sh, better
- EART $24.32
- LITP $7.21
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | EART | LITP |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | B69Higher | D38 |
| Mission | B64 | |
| Risk | C44Higher | F19 |
| Tradability | C48Higher | D34 |
| Holdings | A78Higher | C45 |
| Durability | A70Higher | D38 |
Rank among Critical Materials funds
Same Category. EART and LITP are both graded against the same 12 Critical Materials funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
EARTB
LITPD
In short
EART Rare earths are the headline, but the basket runs wider: ten critical-material categories, from copper and lithium to cobalt and carbon fiber, screened so miners must earn at least half their revenue from the stuff.
LITP Lithium, undiluted. LITP tracks a rules-based Nasdaq Sprott index of roughly 40 lithium miners worldwide, rather than the broad metals grab bag most critical-materials funds hand you.
Stated mandate
EART The fund seeks exposure to companies producing rare-earth components, metals, and other raw or composite materials needed for expanding critical technologies, including electric vehicles, energy storage, robotics, and radar systems.
LITP The Fund seeks to track, before fees and expenses, the total return performance of the Nasdaq Sprott Lithium Miners Index.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
EART vs LITP Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
EART vs LITP Cost
Overpaying LITP vs EART
$1,082
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
EART 0.59%
$11,635
LITP 0.65%
$12,717
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | EART | LITP | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $1,058 | $1,163 | $105 |
| 20 | $4,051 | $4,440 | $389 |
| 30 | $11,635 | $12,717 | $1,082 |
- 0.59%EART, cheaper
- 0.65%LITP
- Middle half of Critical Materials funds
- Median 0.64%
EART 5th cheapest of 12 funds
LITP 7th cheapest of 12 funds
EART vs LITP Dividends
- EART 0.74%
- LITP 11.95%, better
- EART $0.19
- LITP $0.89
- EART $0.14
- LITP $0.89
- EART Jun 29, 2026
- LITP Dec 18, 2025
- EART Jul 7, 2026
- LITP Dec 22, 2025
- EART Twice a year
- LITP Annual
Distribution history
EART vs LITP Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- EART LITP 50.4%
- Return per unit of risk
- EART LITP −0.06
- Worst fall
- EART LITP −74.8%
- Market sensitivity
- EART 1.29LITP 1.60
EART and LITP in the news
Popular comparisons
- 0.59% · 0.53%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.65% · 0.53%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.59% · 0.47%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.65% · 0.47%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.59% · 0.65%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.65% · 0.65%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
