HRTS vs. UNHW
HRTS (Tema Obesity & Cardiometabolic ETF) and UNHW (Roundhill UNH WeeklyPay ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HRTS is a Health & Biotech Equities fund actively managed by Tema, while UNHW is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill Investments. Both are actively managed. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. HRTS charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for UNHW.
Performance
HRTS vs. UNHW - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HRTS achieves a -5.70% return, which is significantly lower than UNHW's 15.08% return.
HRTS
- 1D
- 0.51%
- 1M
- -0.90%
- YTD
- -5.70%
- 6M
- -5.48%
- 1Y
- 20.97%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
UNHW
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- 2.06%
- YTD
- 15.08%
- 6M
- 11.60%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
HRTS vs. UNHW - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
HRTS Tema Obesity & Cardiometabolic ETF | -5.70% | 0.23% |
UNHW Roundhill UNH WeeklyPay ETF | 15.08% | -3.02% |
Correlation
The correlation between HRTS and UNHW is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 4, 2025 | 0.27 |
HRTS vs. UNHW - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
HRTS
UNHW
Healthcare
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Healthcare
HRTS
UNHW
Basic Materials
HRTS
-
UNHW
-
Communication Services
HRTS
-
UNHW
-
Consumer Cyclical
HRTS
-
UNHW
-
Consumer Defensive
HRTS
-
UNHW
-
Energy
HRTS
-
UNHW
-
Financial Services
HRTS
-
UNHW
-
Industrials
HRTS
-
UNHW
-
Real Estate
HRTS
-
UNHW
-
Technology
HRTS
-
UNHW
-
Utilities
HRTS
-
UNHW
-
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
HRTS vs. UNHW — Risk / Return Rank
HRTS
UNHW
HRTS vs. UNHW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Tema Obesity & Cardiometabolic ETF (HRTS) and Roundhill UNH WeeklyPay ETF (UNHW). 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.
| HRTS | UNHW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.91 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.83 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| HRTS | UNHW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.31 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.55 | 0.50 | +0.05 |
Drawdowns
HRTS vs. UNHW - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HRTS drawdown since its inception was -25.81%, smaller than the maximum UNHW drawdown of -32.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HRTS and UNHW.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HRTS | UNHW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.81% | -32.28% | +6.47% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.01% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -9.14% | -7.06% | -2.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.02% | -12.48% | +3.46% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.36% | — | — |
Volatility
HRTS vs. UNHW - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HRTS | UNHW | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.44% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.26% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.03% | 49.81% | -33.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.07% | 49.81% | -30.74% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.07% | 49.81% | -30.74% |
HRTS vs. UNHW - Expense Ratio Comparison
HRTS has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than UNHW's 0.99% expense ratio.
Dividends
HRTS vs. UNHW - Dividend Comparison
HRTS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.42%, less than UNHW's 17.33% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
HRTS Tema Obesity & Cardiometabolic ETF | 1.42% | 1.34% | 1.63% |
UNHW Roundhill UNH WeeklyPay ETF | 17.33% | 2.81% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
HRTS and UNHW have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, HRTS is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
HRTS is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for UNHW.
UNHW has the higher dividend yield at 17.33%, compared with 1.42% for HRTS.
HRTS is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while UNHW is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: Tema and Roundhill Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for HRTS and 0.99% for UNHW.
Find the right allocation for HRTS and UNHW
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