SPAM vs. ASMH

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM) and ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF (ASMH).

SPAM and ASMH are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. SPAM is a passively managed fund by Themes that tracks the performance of the Solactive Cyber Security Index - Benchmark TR Net. It was launched on Dec 7, 2023. ASMH is a passively managed fund by Precidian Funds that tracks the performance of the ASML Holding NV Sponsored ADR. It was launched on Mar 13, 2025. Both SPAM and ASMH are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

SPAM vs. ASMH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM) and ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF (ASMH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

SPAM vs. ASMH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
SPAM Themes Cybersecurity ETF	-5.88%	10.41%
ASMH ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF	25.77%	58.84%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SPAM achieves a -5.88% return, which is significantly lower than ASMH's 25.77% return.

SPAM

• 1D: 3.78%
• 1M: 0.69%
• YTD: -5.88%
• 6M: -17.32%
• 1Y: 1.94%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ASMH

• 1D: 4.15%
• 1M: -6.47%
• YTD: 25.77%
• 6M: 39.55%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SPAM vs. ASMH - Expense Ratio Comparison

SPAM has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than ASMH's 0.19% expense ratio.

SPAM

Themes Cybersecurity ETF

ASMH

ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF

Return for Risk

SPAM vs. ASMH — Risk / Return Rank

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

SPAM

SPAM Risk / Return Rank: 13
SPAM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
SPAM Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
SPAM Omega Ratio Rank: 14
SPAM Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
SPAM Martin Ratio Rank: 12

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.

SPAM vs. ASMH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM) and ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF (ASMH). 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.

	SPAM	ASMH	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.07	—	—
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.29	—	—
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.04	—	—
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.01	—	—
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	0.02	—	—
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

	SPAM	ASMH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.07	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.27	3.00	-2.73

Correlation

The correlation between SPAM and ASMH is 0.34, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

SPAM vs. ASMH - Dividend Comparison

SPAM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.52%, less than ASMH's 1.29% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024
SPAM Themes Cybersecurity ETF	0.52%	0.49%	0.13%
ASMH ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF	1.29%	0.19%	0.00%

Drawdowns

SPAM vs. ASMH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SPAM drawdown since its inception was -24.02%, which is greater than ASMH's maximum drawdown of -15.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPAM and ASMH.

Drawdown Indicators

	SPAM	ASMH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.02%	-15.89%	-8.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.02%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-20.11%	-11.21%	-8.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.37%	-4.43%	-1.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.78%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	SPAM	ASMH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.04%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.15%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.80%	36.81%	-10.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.51%	36.81%	-13.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.51%	36.81%	-13.30%