PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SPAM vs. CZAR
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

SPAM vs. CZAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM) and Themes Natural Monopoly ETF (CZAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

SPAM vs. CZAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
SPAM
Themes Cybersecurity ETF
-5.88%4.86%10.58%1.66%
CZAR
Themes Natural Monopoly ETF
-4.66%13.32%10.92%2.34%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SPAM achieves a -5.88% return, which is significantly lower than CZAR's -4.66% return.


SPAM

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

CZAR

1D
1.90%
1M
-4.94%
YTD
-4.66%
6M
-4.96%
1Y
5.58%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


SPAM vs. CZAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both SPAM and CZAR have an expense ratio of 0.35%.


Return for Risk

SPAM vs. CZAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

SPAM
SPAM Risk / Return Rank: 1313
Overall Rank
SPAM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SPAM Sortino Ratio Rank: 1515
Sortino Ratio Rank
SPAM Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
SPAM Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
SPAM Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank

CZAR
CZAR Risk / Return Rank: 2323
Overall Rank
CZAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2222
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CZAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 2222
Sortino Ratio Rank
CZAR Omega Ratio Rank: 2222
Omega Ratio Rank
CZAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
CZAR Martin Ratio Rank: 2525
Martin Ratio Rank
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. CZAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM) and Themes Natural Monopoly ETF (CZAR). 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.


SPAMCZARDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.07

0.35

-0.28

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

0.29

0.60

-0.32

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.04

1.08

-0.04

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.01

0.54

-0.53

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

0.02

1.93

-1.91

SPAM vs. CZAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SPAM Sharpe Ratio is 0.07, which is lower than the CZAR Sharpe Ratio of 0.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SPAM and CZAR, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


SPAMCZARDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.07

0.35

-0.28

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.27

0.61

-0.35

Correlation

The correlation between SPAM and CZAR is 0.54, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.


Dividends

SPAM vs. CZAR - Dividend Comparison

SPAM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.52%, less than CZAR's 1.54% yield.


TTM20252024
SPAM
Themes Cybersecurity ETF
0.52%0.49%0.13%
CZAR
Themes Natural Monopoly ETF
1.54%1.47%0.94%

Drawdowns

SPAM vs. CZAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SPAM drawdown since its inception was -24.02%, which is greater than CZAR's maximum drawdown of -13.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPAM and CZAR.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


SPAMCZARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.02%

-13.38%

-10.64%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-24.02%

-10.29%

-13.73%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-20.11%

-7.30%

-12.81%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.37%

-2.06%

-4.31%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

9.78%

2.87%

+6.91%

Volatility

SPAM vs. CZAR - Volatility Comparison

Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM) has a higher volatility of 8.04% compared to Themes Natural Monopoly ETF (CZAR) at 4.80%. This indicates that SPAM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CZAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


SPAMCZARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.04%

4.80%

+3.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.15%

9.72%

+9.43%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.80%

15.91%

+10.89%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

23.51%

15.26%

+8.25%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.51%

15.26%

+8.25%