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

Performance

SPAM vs. USCF - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SPAM achieves a 33.77% return, which is significantly higher than USCF's 3.99% return.


SPAM

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

USCF

1D
-0.16%
1M
1.07%
YTD
3.99%
6M
4.77%
1Y
16.50%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SPAM vs. USCF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
SPAM
Themes Cybersecurity ETF
33.77%4.86%10.58%1.66%
USCF
Themes US Cash Flow Champions ETF
3.99%15.71%17.65%2.14%

Correlation

The correlation between SPAM and USCF is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.34

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 14, 2023

0.41

SPAM vs. USCF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
SPAM
USCF

Technology

88.9%
9.7%

Communication Services

6.7%
0.6%

Industrials

4.0%
0.4%

Real Estate

0.5%
0.1%

Financial Services

0.1%
43.1%

Basic Materials

-

1.7%

Consumer Cyclical

-

2.7%

Consumer Defensive

-

3.4%

Energy

-

21.1%

Healthcare

-

16.6%

Utilities

-

-

Technology

SPAM
88.9%
USCF
9.7%

Communication Services

SPAM
6.7%
USCF
0.6%

Industrials

SPAM
4.0%
USCF
0.4%

Real Estate

SPAM
0.5%
USCF
0.1%

Financial Services

SPAM
0.1%
USCF
43.1%

Basic Materials

SPAM

-

USCF
1.7%

Consumer Cyclical

SPAM

-

USCF
2.7%

Consumer Defensive

SPAM

-

USCF
3.4%

Energy

SPAM

-

USCF
21.1%

Healthcare

SPAM

-

USCF
16.6%

Utilities

SPAM

-

USCF

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

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


Return for Risk

SPAM vs. USCF — Risk / Return Rank

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

SPAM
SPAM Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
SPAM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SPAM Sortino Ratio Rank: 3030
Sortino Ratio Rank
SPAM Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
SPAM Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
SPAM Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
Martin Ratio Rank

USCF
USCF Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
USCF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
USCF Sortino Ratio Rank: 3434
Sortino Ratio Rank
USCF Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
USCF Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
USCF Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
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. USCF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM) and Themes US Cash Flow Champions ETF (USCF). 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.


SPAMUSCFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.14

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.19

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.21

1.24

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.29

2.88

-1.59

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.90

8.69

-5.79

SPAM vs. USCF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SPAM Sharpe Ratio is 1.15, which is comparable to the USCF Sharpe Ratio of 1.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SPAM and USCF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


SPAMUSCFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.15

1.29

-0.14

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.89

1.07

-0.18

Drawdowns

SPAM vs. USCF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SPAM drawdown since its inception was -24.02%, which is greater than USCF's maximum drawdown of -16.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPAM and USCF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SPAMUSCFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.02%

-16.67%

-7.35%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-24.02%

-5.75%

-18.27%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.90%

-0.75%

-3.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.53%

-2.23%

-4.30%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.69%

1.90%

+8.79%

Volatility

SPAM vs. USCF - Volatility Comparison

Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM) has a higher volatility of 10.67% compared to Themes US Cash Flow Champions ETF (USCF) at 2.52%. This indicates that SPAM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than USCF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SPAMUSCFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.67%

2.52%

+8.15%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.35%

10.07%

+12.28%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

27.01%

12.82%

+14.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.72%

15.16%

+9.56%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.72%

15.16%

+9.56%

SPAM vs. USCF - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

SPAM vs. USCF - Dividend Comparison

SPAM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, less than USCF's 1.77% yield.


PositionTTM20252024
SPAM
Themes Cybersecurity ETF
0.37%0.49%0.13%
USCF
Themes US Cash Flow Champions ETF
1.77%1.84%1.19%

Frequently Asked Questions


SPAM and USCF have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SPAM has higher volatility (10.67%) compared to USCF (2.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SPAM dropped -24.02% vs USCF's -16.67%.

On 1-year performance, SPAM leads with 30.91% vs 16.50% for USCF. On fees, USCF is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, USCF has been the lower-risk option at 2.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, SPAM has performed better with a 30.91% return vs 16.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

USCF has the higher dividend yield at 1.77%, compared with 0.37% for SPAM.

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

USCF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.29 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SPAM and USCF

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer