SPAM vs. SMCF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SPAM (Themes Cybersecurity ETF) and SMCF (Themes US Small Cap Cash Flow Champions ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SPAM is a Technology Equities fund tracking the Solactive Cyber Security Index - Benchmark TR Net, while SMCF is a Small Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Solactive US Small Cap Cash Flow Champions Index - Benchmark TR Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, SPAM returned 30.91% vs 32.87% for SMCF. At a 0.50 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SPAM charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for SMCF.

Performance

SPAM vs. SMCF - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SPAM achieves a 33.77% return, which is significantly higher than SMCF's 13.75% return.

SPAM

• 1D: -2.70%
• 1M: 24.26%
• YTD: 33.77%
• 6M: 25.92%
• 1Y: 30.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SMCF

• 1D: -1.14%
• 1M: -1.09%
• YTD: 13.75%
• 6M: 13.63%
• 1Y: 32.87%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SPAM vs. SMCF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
SPAM Themes Cybersecurity ETF	33.77%	4.86%	10.58%	1.66%
SMCF Themes US Small Cap Cash Flow Champions ETF	13.75%	9.56%	16.30%	4.47%

Correlation

The correlation between SPAM and SMCF is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 14, 2023	0.50

The correlation between SPAM and SMCF shifts across timeframes, from 0.36 (1 year) to 0.50 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

SPAM vs. SMCF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SPAM	SMCF
Technology	88.9%	11.0%
Communication Services	6.7%	1.5%
Industrials	4.0%	9.8%
Real Estate	0.5%	0.5%
Financial Services	0.1%	50.0%
Basic Materials	-	0.6%
Consumer Cyclical	-	2.6%
Consumer Defensive	-	1.4%
Energy	-	18.2%
Healthcare	-	4.4%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

SPAM vs. SMCF — Risk / Return Rank

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

SPAM

SPAM Risk / Return Rank: 28
SPAM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
SPAM Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
SPAM Omega Ratio Rank: 30
SPAM Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
SPAM Martin Ratio Rank: 23

SMCF

SMCF Risk / Return Rank: 67
SMCF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
SMCF Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
SMCF Omega Ratio Rank: 59
SMCF Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
SMCF Martin Ratio Rank: 68

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. SMCF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM) and Themes US Small Cap Cash Flow Champions ETF (SMCF). 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	SMCF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.15	2.05	-0.90
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.64	2.95	-1.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.36	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.29	4.63	-3.34
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.90	12.46	-9.56
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SPAM vs. SMCF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SPAM Sharpe Ratio is 1.15, which is lower than the SMCF Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SPAM and SMCF, 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

	SPAM	SMCF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.15	2.05	-0.90
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.89	0.91	-0.01

Drawdowns

SPAM vs. SMCF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SPAM drawdown since its inception was -24.02%, smaller than the maximum SMCF drawdown of -28.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPAM and SMCF.

Drawdown Indicators

	SPAM	SMCF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.02%	-28.48%	+4.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.02%	-7.13%	-16.89%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.90%	-2.44%	-1.46%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.53%	-5.29%	-1.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.69%	2.65%	+8.04%

Volatility

SPAM vs. SMCF - Volatility Comparison

Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM) has a higher volatility of 10.67% compared to Themes US Small Cap Cash Flow Champions ETF (SMCF) at 3.55%. This indicates that SPAM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SMCF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SPAM	SMCF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.67%	3.55%	+7.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.35%	10.00%	+12.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.01%	16.18%	+10.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.72%	20.31%	+4.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.72%	20.31%	+4.41%

SPAM vs. SMCF - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

SPAM vs. SMCF - Dividend Comparison

SPAM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, less than SMCF's 3.44% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
SMCF Themes US Small Cap Cash Flow Champions ETF	3.44%	3.91%	0.61%
SPAM Themes Cybersecurity ETF	0.37%	0.49%	0.13%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SPAM and SMCF in my portfolio?

SPAM and SMCF have a correlation of 0.36, 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 SMCF?

SPAM has higher volatility (10.67%) compared to SMCF (3.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SPAM dropped -24.02% vs SMCF's -28.48%.

Which ETF is better, SPAM or SMCF?

On 1-year performance, SMCF leads with 32.87% vs 30.91% for SPAM. On fees, SMCF is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, SMCF has been the lower-risk option at 3.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SPAM or SMCF?

Over the 1-year period, SMCF has performed better with a 32.87% return vs 30.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SPAM or SMCF?

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

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

SMCF has the higher dividend yield at 3.44%, compared with 0.37% for SPAM.

What is the main difference between SPAM and SMCF?

SPAM is categorized as Technology Equities, while SMCF is Small Cap Value Equities. SPAM tracks Solactive Cyber Security Index - Benchmark TR Net, while SMCF tracks Solactive US Small Cap Cash Flow Champions Index - Benchmark TR Gross. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for SPAM and 0.29% for SMCF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SMCF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 vs 1.15), 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.