LGHT vs. CNCR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

LGHT (Langar Global HealthTech ETF) and CNCR (Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. LGHT is actively managed, while CNCR is passively managed. LGHT charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for CNCR.

Performance

LGHT vs. CNCR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Langar Global HealthTech ETF (LGHT) and Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy ETF (CNCR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

LGHT

• 1D: 0.55%
• 1M: -2.36%
• YTD: -19.52%
• 6M: -20.39%
• 1Y: -22.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CNCR

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LGHT vs. CNCR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
LGHT Langar Global HealthTech ETF	-16.08%
CNCR Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy ETF	0.00%

LGHT vs. CNCR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LGHT	CNCR
Healthcare	100.0%	96.6%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	3.3%
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

LGHT vs. CNCR — Risk / Return Rank

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

LGHT

LGHT Risk / Return Rank: 1
LGHT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
LGHT Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
LGHT Omega Ratio Rank: 1
LGHT Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
LGHT Martin Ratio Rank: 0

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.

LGHT vs. CNCR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Langar Global HealthTech ETF (LGHT) 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.

	LGHT	CNCR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.22	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.66	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.81	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.87	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-2.04	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	LGHT	CNCR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-1.22	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.50	—	—

Drawdowns

LGHT vs. CNCR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LGHT drawdown since its inception was -28.60%, which is greater than CNCR's maximum drawdown of 0.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LGHT and CNCR.

Drawdown Indicators

	LGHT	CNCR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.60%	0.00%	-28.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-25.57%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-27.64%	0.00%	-27.64%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.57%	0.00%	-7.57%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.92%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	LGHT	CNCR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.98%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.88%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.29%	0.00%	+18.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.89%	0.00%	+18.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.89%	0.00%	+18.89%

LGHT vs. CNCR - Expense Ratio Comparison

LGHT has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than CNCR's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

LGHT vs. CNCR - Dividend Comparison

Neither LGHT nor CNCR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Which ETF is better, LGHT or CNCR?

On fees, CNCR is cheaper at 0.79% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, LGHT or CNCR?

CNCR is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for LGHT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LGHT or CNCR?

LGHT and CNCR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between LGHT and CNCR?

They also come from different issuers: Langar and Exchange Traded Concepts. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for LGHT and 0.79% for CNCR.