IBB vs. CANC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IBB (iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF) and CANC (Tema Oncology ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. IBB is passively managed, while CANC is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, IBB returned 9.40%/yr vs 107.71%/yr for CANC. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IBB charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CANC.

Performance

IBB vs. CANC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF (IBB) 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, IBB achieves a -0.68% return, which is significantly lower than CANC's 4.74% return.

IBB

• 1D: 1.97%
• 1M: -1.56%
• YTD: -0.68%
• 6M: -2.57%
• 1Y: 34.50%
• 3Y*: 9.40%
• 5Y*: 2.10%
• 10Y*: 6.23%

CANC

• 1D: -2.40%
• 1M: -2.10%
• YTD: 4.74%
• 6M: 5.93%
• 1Y: 49.25%
• 3Y*: 107.71%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IBB vs. CANC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IBB iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF	-0.68%	27.98%	-2.41%	3.76%	-13.69%	-5.58%
CANC Tema Oncology ETF	4.74%	42.92%	-5.37%	510.51%	-85.34%	-51.82%

Correlation

The correlation between IBB and CANC is 0.84, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.84
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2021	0.54

Over the past year, IBB and CANC have become more correlated (0.84) than their long-term average of 0.54, meaning their price movements have been converging.

IBB vs. CANC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IBB	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

IBB vs. CANC — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBB

IBB Risk / Return Rank: 56
IBB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
IBB Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
IBB Omega Ratio Rank: 46
IBB Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
IBB Martin Ratio Rank: 62

CANC

CANC Risk / Return Rank: 70
CANC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
CANC Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
CANC Omega Ratio Rank: 55
CANC Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
CANC Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

IBB vs. CANC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF (IBB) 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.

	IBB	CANC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.74	2.14	-0.40
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.50	3.05	-0.54
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.35	-0.05
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.60	5.75	-2.15
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.43	15.57	-4.14
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IBB vs. CANC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBB Sharpe Ratio is 1.74, which is comparable to the CANC Sharpe Ratio of 2.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBB 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

	IBB	CANC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.74	2.14	-0.40
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.10	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.27	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.26	-0.04	+0.29

Drawdowns

IBB vs. CANC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBB drawdown since its inception was -62.85%, smaller than the maximum CANC drawdown of -97.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBB and CANC.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBB	CANC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.85%	-97.53%	+34.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.63%	-8.67%	-0.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.85%	-30.27%	+5.42%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.82%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.82%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.64%	-56.58%	+50.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.18%	-73.20%	+52.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.03%	3.20%	-0.17%

Volatility

IBB vs. CANC - Volatility Comparison

iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF (IBB) and Tema Oncology ETF (CANC) have volatilities of 6.86% and 6.55%, 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

	IBB	CANC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.86%	6.55%	+0.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.38%	16.79%	-1.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.89%	23.11%	-3.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.99%	280.39%	-258.40%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.22%	280.39%	-257.17%

IBB vs. CANC - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBB has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is lower than CANC's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBB vs. CANC - Dividend Comparison

IBB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.23%, more than CANC's 0.05% yield.

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%
IBB iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF	0.23%	0.23%	0.29%	0.26%	0.31%	0.21%	0.21%	0.33%	0.20%	0.30%	0.19%	0.03%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBB and CANC in my portfolio?

IBB and CANC have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IBB or CANC?

IBB has higher volatility (6.86%) compared to CANC (6.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBB dropped -62.85% vs CANC's -97.53%.

Which ETF is better, IBB or CANC?

On 3-year performance, CANC leads with 107.71% vs 9.40% for IBB. On fees, IBB is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, CANC has been the lower-risk option at 6.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IBB or CANC?

Over the 3-year period, CANC has performed better with a 107.71% return vs 9.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBB or CANC?

IBB is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CANC.

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

IBB has the higher dividend yield at 0.23%, compared with 0.05% for CANC.

What is the main difference between IBB and CANC?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Tema. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for IBB and 0.75% for CANC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CANC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.14 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.