PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CZAR vs. BOTT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CZAR vs. BOTT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Themes Natural Monopoly ETF (CZAR) and Themes Humanoid Robotics ETF (BOTT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CZAR achieves a -0.38% return, which is significantly lower than BOTT's 28.18% return.


CZAR

1D
-0.09%
1M
0.09%
YTD
-0.38%
6M
1.10%
1Y
4.21%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BOTT

1D
0.57%
1M
3.58%
YTD
28.18%
6M
43.51%
1Y
89.96%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CZAR vs. BOTT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
CZAR
Themes Natural Monopoly ETF
-0.38%13.32%9.18%
BOTT
Themes Humanoid Robotics ETF
28.18%55.56%10.74%

Correlation

The correlation between CZAR and BOTT is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.34

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 23, 2024

0.49

The correlation between CZAR and BOTT shifts across timeframes, from 0.34 (1 year) to 0.49 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CZAR vs. BOTT - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CZAR
BOTT

Industrials

27.3%
41.2%

Technology

20.9%
17.9%

Financial Services

17.0%
-0.0%

Healthcare

8.2%

-

Consumer Cyclical

6.1%
12.3%

Consumer Defensive

5.8%

-

Energy

3.9%

-

Basic Materials

3.5%

-

Utilities

2.7%

-

Communication Services

2.3%

-

Real Estate

-

-

Industrials

CZAR
27.3%
BOTT
41.2%

Technology

CZAR
20.9%
BOTT
17.9%

Financial Services

CZAR
17.0%
BOTT
-0.0%

Healthcare

CZAR
8.2%
BOTT

-

Consumer Cyclical

CZAR
6.1%
BOTT
12.3%

Consumer Defensive

CZAR
5.8%
BOTT

-

Energy

CZAR
3.9%
BOTT

-

Basic Materials

CZAR
3.5%
BOTT

-

Utilities

CZAR
2.7%
BOTT

-

Communication Services

CZAR
2.3%
BOTT

-

Real Estate

CZAR

-

BOTT

-

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

CZAR vs. BOTT — Risk / Return Rank

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

CZAR
CZAR Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
CZAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CZAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
CZAR Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
CZAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 1616
Calmar Ratio Rank
CZAR Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
Martin Ratio Rank

BOTT
BOTT Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
BOTT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BOTT Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
BOTT Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
BOTT Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
BOTT Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CZAR vs. BOTT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Natural Monopoly ETF (CZAR) and Themes Humanoid Robotics ETF (BOTT). 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.


CZARBOTTDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.35

2.45

-2.10

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

0.57

3.08

-2.51

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.38

-0.31

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.62

2.99

-2.37

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

1.94

8.10

-6.15

CZAR vs. BOTT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CZAR Sharpe Ratio is 0.35, which is lower than the BOTT Sharpe Ratio of 2.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CZAR and BOTT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CZARBOTTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.35

2.45

-2.10

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.71

1.38

-0.67

Drawdowns

CZAR vs. BOTT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CZAR drawdown since its inception was -13.38%, smaller than the maximum BOTT drawdown of -30.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CZAR and BOTT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CZARBOTTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.38%

-30.74%

+17.36%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.54%

-30.74%

+21.20%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.13%

-14.22%

+11.09%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.18%

-6.75%

+4.57%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.04%

11.36%

-8.32%

Volatility

CZAR vs. BOTT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Themes Natural Monopoly ETF (CZAR) is 3.09%, while Themes Humanoid Robotics ETF (BOTT) has a volatility of 10.86%. This indicates that CZAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BOTT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CZARBOTTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.09%

10.86%

-7.77%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.84%

30.93%

-21.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.31%

36.95%

-24.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.04%

33.32%

-18.28%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.04%

33.32%

-18.28%

CZAR vs. BOTT - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both CZAR and BOTT have an expense ratio of 0.35%.


Dividends

CZAR vs. BOTT - Dividend Comparison

CZAR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.48%, more than BOTT's 0.11% yield.


PositionTTM20252024
BOTT
Themes Humanoid Robotics ETF
0.11%0.14%1.74%
CZAR
Themes Natural Monopoly ETF
1.48%1.47%0.94%

Frequently Asked Questions


CZAR and BOTT have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BOTT has higher volatility (10.86%) compared to CZAR (3.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CZAR dropped -13.38% vs BOTT's -30.74%.

On 1-year performance, BOTT leads with 89.96% vs 4.21% for CZAR. Both ETFs have the same 0.35% expense ratio. On volatility, CZAR has been the lower-risk option at 3.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BOTT has performed better with a 89.96% return vs 4.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CZAR and BOTT have the same expense ratio: 0.35% per year.

CZAR has the higher dividend yield at 1.48%, compared with 0.11% for BOTT.

CZAR is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BOTT is Robotics. CZAR tracks Solactive Natural Monopoly Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while BOTT tracks Solactive Global Humanoid Robotics Index.

BOTT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.45 vs 0.35), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CZAR and BOTT

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