CANC vs. PBPH
CANC (Tema Oncology ETF) and PBPH (Portfolio Building Block World Pharma and Biotech Index ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. CANC is actively managed, while PBPH is passively managed. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CANC charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.13%/yr for PBPH.
Performance
CANC vs. PBPH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CANC achieves a 4.82% return, which is significantly higher than PBPH's -1.13% return.
CANC
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- -3.73%
- YTD
- 4.82%
- 6M
- 3.86%
- 1Y
- 47.37%
- 3Y*
- 107.76%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PBPH
- 1D
- 0.58%
- 1M
- 0.07%
- YTD
- -1.13%
- 6M
- -0.02%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CANC vs. PBPH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CANC Tema Oncology ETF | 4.82% | -2.22% |
PBPH Portfolio Building Block World Pharma and Biotech Index ETF | -1.13% | 0.76% |
Correlation
The correlation between CANC and PBPH is 0.75, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 26, 2025 | 0.75 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CANC vs. PBPH — Risk / Return Rank
CANC
PBPH
CANC vs. PBPH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Tema Oncology ETF (CANC) and Portfolio Building Block World Pharma and Biotech Index ETF (PBPH). 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.
| CANC | PBPH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.34 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.49 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.62 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CANC | PBPH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.06 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.04 | -0.04 | +0.01 |
Drawdowns
CANC vs. PBPH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CANC drawdown since its inception was -97.53%, which is greater than PBPH's maximum drawdown of -11.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CANC and PBPH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CANC | PBPH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -97.53% | -11.10% | -86.43% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.67% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -30.27% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -56.55% | -8.69% | -47.86% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -73.19% | -4.23% | -68.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.25% | — | — |
Volatility
CANC vs. PBPH - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CANC | PBPH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.26% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.69% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 23.11% | 16.78% | +6.33% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 280.27% | 16.78% | +263.49% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 280.27% | 16.78% | +263.49% |
CANC vs. PBPH - Expense Ratio Comparison
CANC has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than PBPH's 0.13% expense ratio.
Dividends
CANC vs. PBPH - Dividend Comparison
CANC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.05%, less than PBPH's 0.09% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CANC Tema Oncology ETF | 0.05% | 0.06% | 3.00% | 0.56% |
PBPH Portfolio Building Block World Pharma and Biotech Index ETF | 0.09% | 0.09% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CANC and PBPH have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, PBPH is cheaper at 0.13% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
PBPH is cheaper with a 0.13% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CANC.
PBPH has the higher dividend yield at 0.09%, compared with 0.05% for CANC.
They also come from different issuers: Tema and Portfolio Building Block. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CANC and 0.13% for PBPH.
Find the right allocation for CANC and PBPH
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer