LFSC vs. CNCR
Compare and contrast key facts about F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) and Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy ETF (CNCR).
LFSC and CNCR are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. LFSC is an actively managed fund by F/m Investments. It was launched on Oct 30, 2024. CNCR is a passively managed fund by Exchange Traded Concepts that tracks the performance of the Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy Index. It was launched on Oct 13, 2015.
Performance
LFSC vs. CNCR - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
LFSC vs. CNCR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF | -0.99% |
CNCR Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy ETF | 0.00% |
Returns By Period
LFSC
- 1D
- 6.16%
- 1M
- -3.82%
- YTD
- -4.45%
- 6M
- 17.66%
- 1Y
- 55.83%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CNCR
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
LFSC vs. CNCR - Expense Ratio Comparison
LFSC has a 0.54% expense ratio, which is lower than CNCR's 0.79% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
LFSC vs. CNCR — Risk / Return Rank
LFSC
CNCR
LFSC vs. CNCR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) and Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy ETF (CNCR). 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.
| LFSC | CNCR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.93 | — | — |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.65 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.20 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.96 | — | — |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| LFSC | CNCR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.93 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.94 | — | — |
Dividends
LFSC vs. CNCR - Dividend Comparison
Neither LFSC nor CNCR has paid dividends to shareholders.
Drawdowns
LFSC vs. CNCR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LFSC drawdown since its inception was -29.74%, which is greater than CNCR's maximum drawdown of 0.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LFSC and CNCR.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| LFSC | CNCR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -29.74% | 0.00% | -29.74% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.25% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -11.08% | 0.00% | -11.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.25% | 0.00% | -8.25% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.80% | — | — |
Volatility
LFSC vs. CNCR - Volatility Comparison
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| LFSC | CNCR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.35% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.97% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 29.24% | 0.00% | +29.24% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.31% | 0.00% | +29.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 29.31% | 0.00% | +29.31% |