FOOD.L vs. SMH.L

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

FOOD.L (Rize Sustainable Future of Food UCITS ETF A USD) and SMH.L (VanEck Semiconductor UCITS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FOOD.L is a Technology Equities fund tracking the Rize Sustainable Future of Food UCITS ETF A USD, while SMH.L is a Semiconductors fund tracking the MarketVector US Listed Semiconductor 10% Capped Screened Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FOOD.L returned -9.02%/yr vs 35.65%/yr for SMH.L. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FOOD.L charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for SMH.L.

Performance

FOOD.L vs. SMH.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rize Sustainable Future of Food UCITS ETF A USD (FOOD.L) and VanEck Semiconductor UCITS ETF (SMH.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FOOD.L achieves a 4.32% return, which is significantly lower than SMH.L's 76.50% return.

FOOD.L

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: 1.57%
• 6M: -0.79%
• YTD: 4.32%
• 1Y: -3.28%
• 3Y*: -3.92%
• 5Y*: -9.02%
• 10Y*: —

SMH.L

• 1D: -3.48%
• 1M: -8.87%
• 6M: 62.90%
• YTD: 76.50%
• 1Y: 124.23%
• 3Y*: 54.24%
• 5Y*: 35.65%
• 10Y*: —

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

FOOD.L vs. SMH.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FOOD.L Rize Sustainable Future of Food UCITS ETF A USD	4.32%	-2.89%	-7.32%	-1.58%	-26.82%	1.07%	4.26%
SMH.L VanEck Semiconductor UCITS ETF	76.50%	49.20%	24.11%	75.94%	-35.54%	42.75%	4.36%

Correlation

The correlation between FOOD.L and SMH.L is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.22
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.34
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 1, 2020	0.51

Over the past year, the correlation between FOOD.L and SMH.L has dropped to 0.22 - well below their long-term average of 0.51, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

FOOD.L vs. SMH.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

FOOD.L

FOOD.L Risk / Return Rank: 8
FOOD.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
FOOD.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
FOOD.L Omega Ratio Rank: 7
FOOD.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
FOOD.L Martin Ratio Rank: 8

SMH.L

SMH.L Risk / Return Rank: 95
SMH.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
SMH.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
SMH.L Omega Ratio Rank: 91
SMH.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
SMH.L Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

FOOD.L vs. SMH.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rize Sustainable Future of Food UCITS ETF A USD (FOOD.L) and VanEck Semiconductor UCITS ETF (SMH.L). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	FOOD.L	SMH.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.15	3.35	-3.49
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.10	3.71	-3.81
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.99	1.47	-0.48
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.14	8.88	-9.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.27	27.77	-28.04

FOOD.L vs. SMH.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FOOD.L Sharpe Ratio is -0.15, which is lower than the SMH.L Sharpe Ratio of 3.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FOOD.L and SMH.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FOOD.L vs. SMH.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FOOD.L drawdown since its inception was -47.70%, which is greater than SMH.L's maximum drawdown of -45.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FOOD.L and SMH.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	FOOD.L	SMH.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-47.70%	-45.38%	-2.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.06%	-13.91%	-2.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.15%	-36.25%	+12.10%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-47.70%	-45.38%	-2.32%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-40.08%	-11.91%	-28.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-28.63%	-11.12%	-17.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.64%	4.46%	+4.18%

Volatility

FOOD.L vs. SMH.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Rize Sustainable Future of Food UCITS ETF A USD (FOOD.L) is 4.65%, while VanEck Semiconductor UCITS ETF (SMH.L) has a volatility of 16.26%. This indicates that FOOD.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SMH.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FOOD.L	SMH.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.65%	16.26%	-11.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.11%	30.80%	-18.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.77%	36.96%	-21.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.70%	33.56%	-14.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.20%	32.93%	-14.73%

FOOD.L vs. SMH.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

FOOD.L has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than SMH.L's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

FOOD.L vs. SMH.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither FOOD.L nor SMH.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FOOD.L and SMH.L in my portfolio?

FOOD.L and SMH.L have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FOOD.L or SMH.L?

On fees, SMH.L is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FOOD.L or SMH.L?

SMH.L is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for FOOD.L.

What is the main difference between FOOD.L and SMH.L?

FOOD.L is categorized as Technology Equities, while SMH.L is Semiconductors. FOOD.L tracks Rize Sustainable Future of Food UCITS ETF A USD, while SMH.L tracks MarketVector US Listed Semiconductor 10% Capped Screened Index. They also come from different issuers: Rize ETF and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for FOOD.L and 0.35% for SMH.L.