CANC vs. XBI

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

CANC (Tema Oncology ETF) and XBI (SPDR S&P Biotech ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. CANC is actively managed, while XBI is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CANC returned 107.71%/yr vs 14.12%/yr for XBI. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CANC charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for XBI.

Performance

CANC vs. XBI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Tema Oncology ETF (CANC) and SPDR S&P Biotech ETF (XBI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with CANC having a 4.74% return and XBI slightly higher at 4.78%.

CANC

• 1D: -2.40%
• 1M: -2.10%
• YTD: 4.74%
• 6M: 5.93%
• 1Y: 49.25%
• 3Y*: 107.71%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

XBI

• 1D: -4.39%
• 1M: -2.04%
• YTD: 4.78%
• 6M: 8.21%
• 1Y: 57.84%
• 3Y*: 14.12%
• 5Y*: 0.26%
• 10Y*: 8.35%

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

CANC vs. XBI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CANC Tema Oncology ETF	4.74%	42.92%	-5.37%	510.51%	-85.34%	-51.82%
XBI SPDR S&P Biotech ETF	4.78%	35.89%	1.01%	7.60%	-25.87%	-10.94%

Correlation

The correlation between CANC and XBI is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.86
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2021	0.54

Over the past year, CANC and XBI have become more correlated (0.86) than their long-term average of 0.54, meaning their price movements have been converging.

CANC vs. XBI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CANC	XBI
Healthcare	100.0%	99.8%
Basic Materials	-	0.2%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	0.2%
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

CANC vs. XBI — Risk / Return Rank

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

CANC

CANC Risk / Return Rank: 70
CANC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
CANC Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
CANC Omega Ratio Rank: 55
CANC Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
CANC Martin Ratio Rank: 78

XBI

XBI Risk / Return Rank: 75
XBI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
XBI Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
XBI Omega Ratio Rank: 61
XBI Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
XBI Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

CANC vs. XBI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Tema Oncology ETF (CANC) and SPDR S&P Biotech ETF (XBI). 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	XBI	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.14	2.28	-0.14
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.05	3.14	-0.09
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.37	-0.03
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.75	6.37	-0.62
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	15.57	19.55	-3.98
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CANC vs. XBI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CANC Sharpe Ratio is 2.14, which is comparable to the XBI Sharpe Ratio of 2.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CANC and XBI, 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

	CANC	XBI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.14	2.28	-0.14
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.01	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.26	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.04	0.36	-0.39

Drawdowns

CANC vs. XBI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CANC drawdown since its inception was -97.53%, which is greater than XBI's maximum drawdown of -63.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CANC and XBI.

Drawdown Indicators

	CANC	XBI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-97.53%	-63.89%	-33.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.67%	-9.72%	+1.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.27%	-32.99%	+2.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-54.71%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-63.89%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-56.58%	-26.16%	-30.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-73.20%	-20.93%	-52.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.20%	3.17%	+0.03%

Volatility

CANC vs. XBI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Tema Oncology ETF (CANC) is 6.55%, while SPDR S&P Biotech ETF (XBI) has a volatility of 9.43%. This indicates that CANC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XBI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CANC	XBI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.55%	9.43%	-2.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.79%	20.31%	-3.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.11%	25.57%	-2.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	280.39%	32.17%	+248.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	280.39%	32.00%	+248.39%

CANC vs. XBI - Expense Ratio Comparison

CANC has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than XBI's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

CANC vs. XBI - Dividend Comparison

CANC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.05%, less than XBI's 0.34% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CANC Tema Oncology ETF	0.05%	0.06%	3.00%	0.56%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XBI SPDR S&P Biotech ETF	0.34%	0.37%	0.15%	0.02%	0.00%	0.04%	0.20%	0.00%	0.28%	0.24%	0.26%	0.61%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CANC and XBI in my portfolio?

CANC and XBI have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CANC or XBI?

XBI has higher volatility (9.43%) compared to CANC (6.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CANC dropped -97.53% vs XBI's -63.89%.

Which ETF is better, CANC or XBI?

On 3-year performance, CANC leads with 107.71% vs 14.12% for XBI. On fees, XBI is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, CANC has been the lower-risk option at 6.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CANC or XBI?

Over the 3-year period, CANC has performed better with a 107.71% return vs 14.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CANC or XBI?

XBI is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CANC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CANC or XBI?

XBI has the higher dividend yield at 0.34%, compared with 0.05% for CANC.

What is the main difference between CANC and XBI?

They also come from different issuers: Tema and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for CANC and 0.35% for XBI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XBI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.28 vs 2.14), 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.