SPAM vs. HWAY

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

SPAM (Themes Cybersecurity ETF) and HWAY (Themes US Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SPAM is a Technology Equities fund tracking the Solactive Cyber Security Index - Benchmark TR Net, while HWAY is a Infrastructure Equities fund tracking the Solactive United States Infrastructure Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, SPAM returned 31.93% vs 32.92% for HWAY. Their 0.38 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. SPAM charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for HWAY.

Performance

SPAM vs. HWAY - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SPAM achieves a 33.96% return, which is significantly higher than HWAY's 22.94% return.

SPAM

• 1D: 1.63%
• 1M: -2.56%
• 6M: 34.94%
• YTD: 33.96%
• 1Y: 31.93%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 21.07%

HWAY

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -0.03%
• 6M: 14.83%
• YTD: 22.94%
• 1Y: 32.92%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 25.86%

*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)
HWAY Themes US Infrastructure ETF	$22.82K	$23.54K	$29.88K
SPAM Themes Cybersecurity ETF	$48.61K	$58.13K	$116.83K

SPAM vs. HWAY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
SPAM Themes Cybersecurity ETF	33.96%	4.86%	7.59%
HWAY Themes US Infrastructure ETF	22.94%	19.99%	4.42%

Correlation

The correlation between SPAM and HWAY is 0.22, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.22
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 12, 2024	0.38

The correlation between SPAM and HWAY shifts across timeframes, from 0.22 (1 year) to 0.38 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

SPAM vs. HWAY - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SPAM	HWAY
Technology	89.9%	0.0%
Communication Services	6.4%	-
Industrials	3.4%	77.9%
Real Estate	0.3%	-
Financial Services	0.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	20.9%
Consumer Cyclical	-	0.5%
Consumer Defensive	-	0.0%
Energy	-	0.2%
Healthcare	-	-
Utilities	-	0.1%

Return for Risk

SPAM vs. HWAY — Risk / Return Rank

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

SPAM

SPAM Risk / Return Rank: 38
SPAM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
SPAM Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
SPAM Omega Ratio Rank: 39
SPAM Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
SPAM Martin Ratio Rank: 30

HWAY

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

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.

SPAM vs. HWAY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM) and Themes US Infrastructure ETF (HWAY). 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.

	SPAM	HWAY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.03	1.45	-0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.53	2.11	-0.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.25	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.23	2.36	-1.13
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.68	7.98	-5.30

SPAM vs. HWAY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SPAM Sharpe Ratio is 1.03, which is comparable to the HWAY Sharpe Ratio of 1.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SPAM and HWAY, 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

SPAM vs. HWAY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SPAM drawdown since its inception was -24.02%, smaller than the maximum HWAY drawdown of -25.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPAM and HWAY.

Drawdown Indicators

	SPAM	HWAY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.02%	-25.96%	+1.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.02%	-12.63%	-11.39%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.87%	-4.57%	-2.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.51%	-5.20%	-1.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.97%	3.73%	+7.24%

Volatility

SPAM vs. HWAY - Volatility Comparison

Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM) has a higher volatility of 8.48% compared to Themes US Infrastructure ETF (HWAY) at 4.71%. This indicates that SPAM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HWAY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SPAM	HWAY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.48%	4.71%	+3.77%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.09%	16.68%	+7.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.57%	20.52%	+8.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.04%	22.22%	+2.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.04%	22.22%	+2.82%

SPAM vs. HWAY - Expense Ratio Comparison

SPAM has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than HWAY's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

SPAM vs. HWAY - Dividend Comparison

SPAM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, while HWAY has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
HWAY Themes US Infrastructure ETF	1.05%	1.29%	0.22%
SPAM Themes Cybersecurity ETF	0.37%	0.49%	0.13%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SPAM and HWAY in my portfolio?

SPAM and HWAY have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SPAM or HWAY?

SPAM has higher volatility (8.48%) compared to HWAY (4.71%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SPAM dropped -24.02% vs HWAY's -25.96%.

Which ETF is better, SPAM or HWAY?

On 1-year performance, HWAY leads with 32.92% vs 31.93% for SPAM. On fees, HWAY is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, HWAY has been the lower-risk option at 4.71%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SPAM or HWAY?

Over the 1-year period, HWAY has performed better with a 32.92% return vs 31.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SPAM or HWAY?

HWAY is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for SPAM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SPAM or HWAY?

HWAY has the higher dividend yield at 1.05%, compared with 0.37% for SPAM.

What is the main difference between SPAM and HWAY?

SPAM is categorized as Technology Equities, while HWAY is Infrastructure Equities. SPAM tracks Solactive Cyber Security Index - Benchmark TR Net, while HWAY tracks Solactive United States Infrastructure Index. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for SPAM and 0.29% for HWAY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HWAY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.45 vs 1.03), 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.