FBT vs. CANC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FBT (First Trust Amex Biotechnology Index) and CANC (Tema Oncology ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. FBT is passively managed, while CANC is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FBT returned 12.40%/yr vs 107.76%/yr for CANC. A 0.50 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FBT charges 0.57%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CANC.

Performance

FBT vs. CANC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Amex Biotechnology Index (FBT) and Tema Oncology ETF (CANC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBT achieves a 7.08% return, which is significantly higher than CANC's 4.82% return.

FBT

• 1D: 2.92%
• 1M: 6.19%
• YTD: 7.08%
• 6M: 3.95%
• 1Y: 35.94%
• 3Y*: 12.40%
• 5Y*: 6.79%
• 10Y*: 8.86%

CANC

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: -3.73%
• YTD: 4.82%
• 6M: 3.86%
• 1Y: 47.37%
• 3Y*: 107.76%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FBT vs. CANC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FBT First Trust Amex Biotechnology Index	7.08%	24.25%	5.88%	2.55%	-4.83%	-1.13%
CANC Tema Oncology ETF	4.82%	42.92%	-5.37%	510.51%	-85.34%	-51.82%

Correlation

The correlation between FBT and CANC is 0.74, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.74
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.73
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2021	0.50

Over the past year, FBT and CANC have become more correlated (0.74) than their long-term average of 0.50, meaning their price movements have been converging.

FBT vs. CANC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

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

Return for Risk

FBT vs. CANC — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBT

FBT Risk / Return Rank: 49
FBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
FBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
FBT Omega Ratio Rank: 48
FBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
FBT Martin Ratio Rank: 45

CANC

CANC Risk / Return Rank: 69
CANC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
CANC Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
CANC Omega Ratio Rank: 54
CANC Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
CANC Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

FBT vs. CANC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Amex Biotechnology Index (FBT) and Tema Oncology ETF (CANC). 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.

	FBT	CANC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.74	2.06	-0.32
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.56	2.96	-0.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.34	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.53	5.49	-2.96
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.43	14.62	-7.19
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FBT vs. CANC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBT Sharpe Ratio is 1.74, which is comparable to the CANC Sharpe Ratio of 2.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBT and CANC, 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

	FBT	CANC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.74	2.06	-0.32
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.31	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.37	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.51	-0.04	+0.55

Drawdowns

FBT vs. CANC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBT drawdown since its inception was -40.51%, smaller than the maximum CANC drawdown of -97.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBT and CANC.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBT	CANC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.51%	-97.53%	+57.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.26%	-8.67%	-5.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.05%	-30.27%	+10.22%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.05%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.37%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.72%	-56.55%	+55.83%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.17%	-73.19%	+62.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.85%	3.25%	+1.60%

Volatility

FBT vs. CANC - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Amex Biotechnology Index (FBT) has a higher volatility of 6.94% compared to Tema Oncology ETF (CANC) at 6.26%. This indicates that FBT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CANC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBT	CANC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.94%	6.26%	+0.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.87%	16.69%	-0.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.79%	23.11%	-2.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.89%	280.27%	-258.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.91%	280.27%	-256.36%

FBT vs. CANC - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBT has a 0.57% expense ratio, which is lower than CANC's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

FBT vs. CANC - Dividend Comparison

FBT has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CANC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.05%.

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%
FBT First Trust Amex Biotechnology Index	0.00%	0.00%	0.71%	0.00%	0.00%	1.37%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.12%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBT and CANC in my portfolio?

FBT and CANC have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FBT or CANC?

FBT has higher volatility (6.94%) compared to CANC (6.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBT dropped -40.51% vs CANC's -97.53%.

Which ETF is better, FBT or CANC?

On 3-year performance, CANC leads with 107.76% vs 12.40% for FBT. On fees, FBT is cheaper at 0.57% per year. On volatility, CANC has been the lower-risk option at 6.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FBT or CANC?

Over the 3-year period, CANC has performed better with a 107.76% return vs 12.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBT or CANC?

FBT is cheaper with a 0.57% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CANC.

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

CANC has the higher dividend yield at 0.05%, compared with 0.00% for FBT.

What is the main difference between FBT and CANC?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Tema. Their fees differ too: 0.57% for FBT and 0.75% for CANC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CANC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.06 vs 1.74), 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.