RSHO vs. IMCB

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

RSHO (Tema American Reshoring ETF) and IMCB (iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. RSHO is actively managed, while IMCB is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, RSHO returned 30.96%/yr vs 17.85%/yr for IMCB. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RSHO charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for IMCB.

Performance

RSHO vs. IMCB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Tema American Reshoring ETF (RSHO) and iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RSHO achieves a 39.40% return, which is significantly higher than IMCB's 16.74% return.

RSHO

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 5.76%
• YTD: 39.40%
• 6M: 36.26%
• 1Y: 61.78%
• 3Y*: 30.96%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IMCB

• 1D: 0.51%
• 1M: 3.67%
• YTD: 16.74%
• 6M: 15.03%
• 1Y: 24.59%
• 3Y*: 17.85%
• 5Y*: 9.00%
• 10Y*: 12.15%

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

RSHO vs. IMCB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RSHO Tema American Reshoring ETF	39.40%	19.23%	17.28%	28.90%
IMCB iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF	16.74%	10.25%	15.10%	14.71%

Correlation

The correlation between RSHO and IMCB is 0.81, 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	0.81
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2023	0.87

The correlation between RSHO and IMCB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

RSHO vs. IMCB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RSHO	IMCB
Industrials	74.2%	18.5%
Technology	11.8%	22.6%
Basic Materials	8.1%	5.3%
Consumer Cyclical	3.7%	9.1%
Energy	0.9%	6.7%
Financial Services	0.8%	11.9%
Communication Services	-	2.5%
Consumer Defensive	-	5.1%
Healthcare	-	7.9%
Real Estate	-	4.3%
Utilities	-	6.0%

Return for Risk

RSHO vs. IMCB — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSHO

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

IMCB

IMCB Risk / Return Rank: 67
IMCB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
IMCB Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
IMCB Omega Ratio Rank: 62
IMCB Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
IMCB Martin Ratio Rank: 74

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.

RSHO vs. IMCB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Tema American Reshoring ETF (RSHO) and iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB). 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.

	RSHO	IMCB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.62	1.87	+0.75
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.41	2.62	+0.79
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.33	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.45	3.07	+1.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.97	12.02	+4.96

RSHO vs. IMCB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSHO Sharpe Ratio is 2.62, which is higher than the IMCB Sharpe Ratio of 1.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSHO and IMCB, 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

RSHO vs. IMCB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSHO drawdown since its inception was -27.31%, smaller than the maximum IMCB drawdown of -58.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSHO and IMCB.

Drawdown Indicators

	RSHO	IMCB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.31%	-58.80%	+31.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.64%	-8.05%	-6.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.31%	-19.80%	-7.51%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-25.15%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-40.99%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.27%	-7.71%	+3.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.83%	2.05%	+1.78%

Volatility

RSHO vs. IMCB - Volatility Comparison

Tema American Reshoring ETF (RSHO) has a higher volatility of 9.26% compared to iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB) at 4.67%. This indicates that RSHO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IMCB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RSHO	IMCB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.26%	4.67%	+4.59%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.99%	10.25%	+10.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.93%	13.27%	+11.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.82%	17.64%	+5.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.82%	19.65%	+3.17%

RSHO vs. IMCB - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSHO has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than IMCB's 0.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

RSHO vs. IMCB - Dividend Comparison

RSHO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IMCB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.22%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IMCB iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF	1.22%	1.42%	1.43%	1.55%	1.70%	1.08%	1.12%	1.32%	1.80%	1.31%	1.79%	1.47%
RSHO Tema American Reshoring ETF	0.21%	0.30%	0.26%	0.25%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RSHO and IMCB in my portfolio?

RSHO and IMCB have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RSHO or IMCB?

RSHO has higher volatility (9.26%) compared to IMCB (4.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSHO dropped -27.31% vs IMCB's -58.80%.

Which ETF is better, RSHO or IMCB?

On 3-year performance, RSHO leads with 30.96% vs 17.85% for IMCB. On fees, IMCB is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, IMCB has been the lower-risk option at 4.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RSHO or IMCB?

Over the 3-year period, RSHO has performed better with a 30.96% return vs 17.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RSHO or IMCB?

IMCB is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for RSHO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RSHO or IMCB?

IMCB has the higher dividend yield at 1.22%, compared with 0.21% for RSHO.

What is the main difference between RSHO and IMCB?

They also come from different issuers: Tema and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for RSHO and 0.04% for IMCB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RSHO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 vs 1.87), 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.