GNOM vs. CANC

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

GNOM (Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF) and CANC (Tema Oncology ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. GNOM is passively managed, while CANC is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, GNOM returned 2.88%/yr vs 132.65%/yr for CANC. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GNOM charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CANC.

Performance

GNOM vs. CANC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF (GNOM) 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, GNOM achieves a 14.90% return, which is significantly higher than CANC's 11.49% return.

GNOM

• 1D: 0.90%
• 1M: 12.22%
• YTD: 14.90%
• 6M: 11.42%
• 1Y: 61.83%
• 3Y*: 2.88%
• 5Y*: -11.06%
• 10Y*: —

CANC

• 1D: 1.64%
• 1M: 1.56%
• YTD: 11.49%
• 6M: 9.19%
• 1Y: 56.88%
• 3Y*: 132.65%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GNOM vs. CANC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
GNOM Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF	14.90%	18.65%	-15.99%	-8.63%	-36.27%	-9.29%
CANC Tema Oncology ETF	11.49%	42.92%	-5.37%	510.51%	-85.34%	-55.35%

Correlation

The correlation between GNOM 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	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2021	0.51

Over the past year, GNOM and CANC have become more correlated (0.74) than their long-term average of 0.51, meaning their price movements have been converging.

GNOM vs. CANC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GNOM	CANC
Healthcare	99.7%	100.0%
Technology	0.3%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

GNOM vs. CANC — Risk / Return Rank

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

GNOM

GNOM Risk / Return Rank: 68
GNOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
GNOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
GNOM Omega Ratio Rank: 63
GNOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
GNOM Martin Ratio Rank: 58

CANC

CANC Risk / Return Rank: 85
CANC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
CANC Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
CANC Omega Ratio Rank: 74
CANC Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
CANC Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

GNOM vs. CANC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF (GNOM) 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.

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.

	GNOM	CANC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.28	2.52	-0.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.11	3.54	-0.44
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.40	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.42	6.15	-2.73
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.81	16.71	-6.90

GNOM vs. CANC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GNOM Sharpe Ratio is 2.28, which is comparable to the CANC Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GNOM 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.

Drawdowns

GNOM vs. CANC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GNOM drawdown since its inception was -75.00%, smaller than the maximum CANC drawdown of -97.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GNOM and CANC.

Drawdown Indicators

	GNOM	CANC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-75.00%	-97.53%	+22.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.17%	-9.30%	-8.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-44.24%	-30.27%	-13.97%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-72.29%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-52.52%	-53.78%	+1.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-40.63%	-72.94%	+32.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.32%	3.41%	+2.91%

Volatility

GNOM vs. CANC - Volatility Comparison

Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF (GNOM) has a higher volatility of 9.34% compared to Tema Oncology ETF (CANC) at 6.60%. This indicates that GNOM'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

	GNOM	CANC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.34%	6.60%	+2.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.57%	16.94%	+3.63%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.29%	22.72%	+4.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.68%	278.65%	-244.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.17%	278.65%	-244.48%

GNOM vs. CANC - Expense Ratio Comparison

GNOM has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than CANC's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

GNOM vs. CANC - Dividend Comparison

GNOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.20%, more than CANC's 0.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CANC Tema Oncology ETF	0.05%	0.06%	3.00%	0.56%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GNOM Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF	1.20%	1.37%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.03%	0.14%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GNOM and CANC in my portfolio?

GNOM 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, GNOM or CANC?

GNOM has higher volatility (9.34%) compared to CANC (6.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GNOM dropped -75.00% vs CANC's -97.53%.

Which ETF is better, GNOM or CANC?

On 3-year performance, CANC leads with 132.65% vs 2.88% for GNOM. On fees, GNOM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, CANC has been the lower-risk option at 6.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GNOM or CANC?

Over the 3-year period, CANC has performed better with a 132.65% return vs 2.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GNOM or CANC?

GNOM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CANC.

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

GNOM has the higher dividend yield at 1.20%, compared with 0.05% for CANC.

What is the main difference between GNOM and CANC?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and Tema. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for GNOM and 0.75% for CANC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CANC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 2.28), 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.