OZEM vs. SMH

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

OZEM (Roundhill Glp-1 & Weight Loss ETF) and SMH (VanEck Semiconductor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - OZEM is a Health & Biotech Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill, while SMH is a Semiconductors fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Semiconductor 25 Index. OZEM is actively managed, while SMH is passively managed. Over the past year, OZEM returned 22.91% vs 160.66% for SMH. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. OZEM charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for SMH.

Performance

OZEM vs. SMH - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OZEM achieves a -11.30% return, which is significantly lower than SMH's 75.55% return.

OZEM

• 1D: -2.68%
• 1M: -3.32%
• YTD: -11.30%
• 6M: -4.49%
• 1Y: 22.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SMH

• 1D: 4.01%
• 1M: 24.01%
• YTD: 75.55%
• 6M: 76.44%
• 1Y: 160.66%
• 3Y*: 63.68%
• 5Y*: 39.58%
• 10Y*: 37.55%

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

OZEM vs. SMH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
OZEM Roundhill Glp-1 & Weight Loss ETF	-11.30%	41.87%	-3.78%
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF	75.55%	49.17%	3.65%

Correlation

The correlation between OZEM and SMH is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.30
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 22, 2024	0.34

OZEM vs. SMH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

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

Return for Risk

OZEM vs. SMH — Risk / Return Rank

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

OZEM

OZEM Risk / Return Rank: 25
OZEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
OZEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
OZEM Omega Ratio Rank: 26
OZEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
OZEM Martin Ratio Rank: 21

SMH

SMH Risk / Return Rank: 96
SMH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
SMH Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
SMH Omega Ratio Rank: 95
SMH Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
SMH Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

OZEM vs. SMH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Glp-1 & Weight Loss ETF (OZEM) and VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH). 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.

	OZEM	SMH	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.94	5.29	-4.35
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.43	5.29	-3.86
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.73	-0.56
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.26	11.02	-9.76
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	2.64	42.34	-39.70
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

OZEM vs. SMH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OZEM Sharpe Ratio is 0.94, which is lower than the SMH Sharpe Ratio of 5.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OZEM and SMH, 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

	OZEM	SMH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.94	5.29	-4.35
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.14	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	1.16	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.40	0.34	+0.06

Drawdowns

OZEM vs. SMH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OZEM drawdown since its inception was -28.65%, smaller than the maximum SMH drawdown of -84.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OZEM and SMH.

Drawdown Indicators

	OZEM	SMH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.65%	-84.96%	+56.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.16%	-14.93%	-4.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-35.74%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-45.30%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-45.30%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-18.14%	0.00%	-18.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.88%	-41.09%	+32.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.14%	3.89%	+5.25%

Volatility

OZEM vs. SMH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Roundhill Glp-1 & Weight Loss ETF (OZEM) is 5.65%, while VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) has a volatility of 11.59%. This indicates that OZEM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SMH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	OZEM	SMH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.65%	11.59%	-5.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.28%	24.29%	-7.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.46%	30.57%	-6.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.05%	35.02%	-9.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.05%	32.58%	-7.53%

OZEM vs. SMH - Expense Ratio Comparison

OZEM has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than SMH's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

OZEM vs. SMH - Dividend Comparison

OZEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.35%, more than SMH's 0.17% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
OZEM Roundhill Glp-1 & Weight Loss ETF	1.35%	1.20%	0.22%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF	0.17%	0.31%	0.44%	0.60%	1.18%	0.51%	0.69%	1.50%	1.88%	1.43%	0.80%	2.14%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OZEM and SMH in my portfolio?

OZEM and SMH have a correlation of 0.30, 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 SMH?

SMH has higher volatility (11.59%) compared to OZEM (5.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OZEM dropped -28.65% vs SMH's -84.96%.

Which ETF is better, OZEM or SMH?

On 1-year performance, SMH leads with 160.66% vs 22.91% for OZEM. On fees, SMH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, OZEM has been the lower-risk option at 5.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OZEM or SMH?

Over the 1-year period, SMH has performed better with a 160.66% return vs 22.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OZEM or SMH?

SMH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for OZEM.

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

OZEM has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 0.17% for SMH.

What is the main difference between OZEM and SMH?

OZEM is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while SMH is Semiconductors. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for OZEM and 0.35% for SMH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SMH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.29 vs 0.94), 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.