HACK vs. SPAM

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

HACK (Amplify Cybersecurity ETF) and SPAM (Themes Cybersecurity ETF) are both Technology Equities funds - HACK tracks the Nasdaq ISE Cyber Security Select Index while SPAM tracks the Solactive Cyber Security Index - Benchmark TR Net. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, HACK returned 28.11% vs 31.93% for SPAM. Their correlation of 0.89 means they have usually moved in the same direction. HACK charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for SPAM.

Performance

HACK vs. SPAM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Amplify Cybersecurity ETF (HACK) and Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM). 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 HACK having a 32.87% return and SPAM slightly higher at 33.96%.

HACK

• 1D: 1.20%
• 1M: -0.17%
• 6M: 38.24%
• YTD: 32.87%
• 1Y: 28.11%
• 3Y*: 26.69%
• 5Y*: 11.45%
• 10Y*: 15.86%
• ALL TIME*: 13.64%

SPAM

• 1D: 1.63%
• 1M: -2.56%
• 6M: 34.94%
• YTD: 33.96%
• 1Y: 31.93%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 21.07%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
HACK Amplify Cybersecurity ETF	$20.39M	$24.21M	$17.68M
SPAM Themes Cybersecurity ETF	$48.61K	$58.13K	$116.83K

HACK vs. SPAM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
HACK Amplify Cybersecurity ETF	32.87%	7.97%	23.49%	5.37%
SPAM Themes Cybersecurity ETF	33.96%	4.86%	10.58%	6.74%

Correlation

The correlation between HACK and SPAM is 0.90, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 8, 2023	0.89

The correlation between HACK and SPAM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

HACK vs. SPAM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HACK	SPAM
Technology	89.7%	89.9%
Industrials	9.9%	3.4%
Financial Services	0.3%	0.1%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	6.4%
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	0.3%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

HACK vs. SPAM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

HACK

HACK Risk / Return Rank: 37
HACK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
HACK Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
HACK Omega Ratio Rank: 37
HACK Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
HACK Martin Ratio Rank: 32

SPAM

SPAM Risk / Return Rank: 38
SPAM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
SPAM Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
SPAM Omega Ratio Rank: 39
SPAM Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
SPAM Martin Ratio Rank: 30

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

HACK vs. SPAM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amplify Cybersecurity ETF (HACK) and Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM). 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.

	HACK	SPAM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.95	1.03	-0.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.43	1.53	-0.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.19	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.26	1.23	+0.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.95	2.68	+0.27

HACK vs. SPAM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HACK Sharpe Ratio is 0.95, which is comparable to the SPAM Sharpe Ratio of 1.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HACK and SPAM, 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

HACK vs. SPAM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HACK drawdown since its inception was -42.68%, which is greater than SPAM's maximum drawdown of -24.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HACK and SPAM.

Drawdown Indicators

	HACK	SPAM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.68%	-24.02%	-18.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-20.67%	-24.02%	+3.35%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.90%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.68%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-38.68%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.56%	-6.87%	+0.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.55%	-6.51%	-5.04%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.81%	10.97%	-2.16%

Volatility

HACK vs. SPAM - Volatility Comparison

Amplify Cybersecurity ETF (HACK) and Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM) have volatilities of 8.88% and 8.48%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HACK	SPAM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.88%	8.48%	+0.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	23.39%	24.09%	-0.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.37%	28.57%	-1.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.64%	25.04%	-0.40%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.36%	25.04%	-1.68%

HACK vs. SPAM - Expense Ratio Comparison

HACK has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than SPAM's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

HACK vs. SPAM - Dividend Comparison

HACK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.06%, less than SPAM's 0.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
HACK Amplify Cybersecurity ETF	0.06%	0.07%	0.14%	0.20%	0.24%	0.26%	1.11%	0.14%	0.09%	0.01%	1.23%
SPAM Themes Cybersecurity ETF	0.37%	0.49%	0.13%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HACK and SPAM in my portfolio?

HACK and SPAM have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HACK or SPAM?

HACK has higher volatility (8.88%) compared to SPAM (8.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HACK dropped -42.68% vs SPAM's -24.02%.

Which ETF is better, HACK or SPAM?

On 1-year performance, SPAM leads with 31.93% vs 28.11% for HACK. On fees, SPAM is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, SPAM has been the lower-risk option at 8.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, HACK or SPAM?

Over the 1-year period, SPAM has performed better with a 31.93% return vs 28.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HACK or SPAM?

SPAM is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for HACK.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, HACK or SPAM?

SPAM has the higher dividend yield at 0.37%, compared with 0.06% for HACK.

What is the main difference between HACK and SPAM?

HACK tracks Nasdaq ISE Cyber Security Select Index, while SPAM tracks Solactive Cyber Security Index - Benchmark TR Net. They also come from different issuers: Amplify and Themes. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for HACK and 0.35% for SPAM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SPAM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.03 vs 0.95), 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.