OZEM vs. HRTS

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

OZEM (Roundhill Glp-1 & Weight Loss ETF) and HRTS (Tema Obesity & Cardiometabolic ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, OZEM returned 32.51% vs 31.92% for HRTS. Their 0.77 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. OZEM charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for HRTS.

Performance

OZEM vs. HRTS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill Glp-1 & Weight Loss ETF (OZEM) and Tema Obesity & Cardiometabolic ETF (HRTS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OZEM achieves a -7.04% return, which is significantly lower than HRTS's 3.25% return.

OZEM

• 1D: -2.34%
• 1M: -5.35%
• 6M: -11.60%
• YTD: -7.04%
• 1Y: 32.51%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.44%

HRTS

• 1D: -1.26%
• 1M: -2.24%
• 6M: 2.43%
• YTD: 3.25%
• 1Y: 31.92%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.15%

*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)
HRTS Tema Obesity & Cardiometabolic ETF	$413.90K	$241.96K	$213.63K
OZEM Roundhill Glp-1 & Weight Loss ETF	$377.67K	$656.35K	$729.31K

OZEM vs. HRTS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
OZEM Roundhill Glp-1 & Weight Loss ETF	-7.04%	41.87%	-3.85%
HRTS Tema Obesity & Cardiometabolic ETF	3.25%	23.93%	-10.23%

Correlation

The correlation between OZEM and HRTS is 0.75, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.75
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 21, 2024	0.77

The correlation between OZEM and HRTS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

OZEM vs. HRTS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	OZEM	HRTS
Healthcare	99.2%	100.0%
Financial Services	0.1%	-
Technology	0.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

OZEM vs. HRTS — Risk / Return Rank

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

OZEM

OZEM Risk / Return Rank: 52
OZEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
OZEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
OZEM Omega Ratio Rank: 56
OZEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
OZEM Martin Ratio Rank: 34

HRTS

HRTS Risk / Return Rank: 79
HRTS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
HRTS Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
HRTS Omega Ratio Rank: 81
HRTS Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
HRTS Martin Ratio Rank: 60

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.

OZEM vs. HRTS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Glp-1 & Weight Loss ETF (OZEM) and Tema Obesity & Cardiometabolic ETF (HRTS). 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.

	OZEM	HRTS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.42	2.02	-0.60
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.08	3.03	-0.95
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.34	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.71	2.98	-1.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.34	7.24	-3.89

OZEM vs. HRTS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OZEM Sharpe Ratio is 1.42, which is comparable to the HRTS Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OZEM and HRTS, 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

OZEM vs. HRTS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OZEM drawdown since its inception was -28.65%, which is greater than HRTS's maximum drawdown of -25.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OZEM and HRTS.

Drawdown Indicators

	OZEM	HRTS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.65%	-25.81%	-2.84%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.50%	-11.01%	-8.49%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-14.20%	-3.01%	-11.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.24%	-8.69%	-0.55%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.95%	4.52%	+5.43%

Volatility

OZEM vs. HRTS - Volatility Comparison

Roundhill Glp-1 & Weight Loss ETF (OZEM) has a higher volatility of 5.88% compared to Tema Obesity & Cardiometabolic ETF (HRTS) at 5.48%. This indicates that OZEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HRTS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	OZEM	HRTS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.88%	5.48%	+0.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.84%	12.35%	+4.49%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.63%	16.36%	+7.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.82%	19.05%	+5.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.82%	19.05%	+5.77%

OZEM vs. HRTS - Expense Ratio Comparison

OZEM has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than HRTS's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

OZEM vs. HRTS - Dividend Comparison

OZEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.29%, which matches HRTS's 1.30% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
HRTS Tema Obesity & Cardiometabolic ETF	1.30%	1.34%	1.63%
OZEM Roundhill Glp-1 & Weight Loss ETF	1.29%	1.20%	0.22%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OZEM and HRTS in my portfolio?

OZEM and HRTS have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, OZEM or HRTS?

OZEM has higher volatility (5.88%) compared to HRTS (5.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OZEM dropped -28.65% vs HRTS's -25.81%.

Which ETF is better, OZEM or HRTS?

On 1-year performance, OZEM leads with 32.51% vs 31.92% for HRTS. On fees, OZEM is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, HRTS has been the lower-risk option at 5.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OZEM or HRTS?

Over the 1-year period, OZEM has performed better with a 32.51% return vs 31.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OZEM or HRTS?

OZEM is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for HRTS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, OZEM or HRTS?

OZEM and HRTS have nearly identical dividend yields, around 1.29%.

What is the main difference between OZEM and HRTS?

They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and Tema. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for OZEM and 0.75% for HRTS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HRTS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.02 vs 1.42), 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.