SPAM vs. XSW

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

SPAM (Themes Cybersecurity ETF) and XSW (SPDR S&P Software & Services ETF) are both Technology Equities funds - SPAM tracks the Solactive Cyber Security Index - Benchmark TR Net while XSW tracks the S&P Software & Services Select Industry Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, SPAM returned 19.19% vs -10.76% for XSW. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.35% expense ratio.

Performance

SPAM vs. XSW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM) and SPDR S&P Software & Services ETF (XSW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SPAM achieves a 23.17% return, which is significantly higher than XSW's -14.42% return.

SPAM

• 1D: -0.99%
• 1M: -1.58%
• YTD: 23.17%
• 6M: 18.54%
• 1Y: 19.19%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

XSW

• 1D: -1.47%
• 1M: -2.96%
• YTD: -14.42%
• 6M: -17.32%
• 1Y: -10.76%
• 3Y*: 7.75%
• 5Y*: -1.17%
• 10Y*: 12.71%

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

SPAM vs. XSW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
SPAM Themes Cybersecurity ETF	23.17%	4.86%	10.58%	6.74%
XSW SPDR S&P Software & Services ETF	-14.42%	-0.90%	25.81%	7.30%

Correlation

The correlation between SPAM and XSW is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 8, 2023	0.83

The correlation between SPAM and XSW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

SPAM vs. XSW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SPAM	XSW
Technology	89.6%	85.9%
Communication Services	5.7%	2.7%
Industrials	4.4%	0.6%
Real Estate	0.4%	-
Financial Services	0.1%	9.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	1.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	0.8%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

SPAM vs. XSW — Risk / Return Rank

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

SPAM

SPAM Risk / Return Rank: 19
SPAM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
SPAM Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
SPAM Omega Ratio Rank: 20
SPAM Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
SPAM Martin Ratio Rank: 17

XSW

XSW Risk / Return Rank: 6
XSW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
XSW Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
XSW Omega Ratio Rank: 5
XSW Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
XSW Martin Ratio Rank: 6

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. XSW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM) and SPDR S&P Software & Services ETF (XSW). 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	XSW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.70	-0.37	+1.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.11	-0.34	+1.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	0.96	+0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.80	-0.32	+1.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.76	-0.66	+2.43

SPAM vs. XSW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SPAM Sharpe Ratio is 0.70, which is higher than the XSW Sharpe Ratio of -0.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SPAM and XSW, 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. XSW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SPAM drawdown since its inception was -24.02%, smaller than the maximum XSW drawdown of -45.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SPAM and XSW.

Drawdown Indicators

	SPAM	XSW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.02%	-45.38%	+21.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.02%	-33.75%	+9.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-33.75%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-45.38%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-45.38%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.52%	-21.97%	+10.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.58%	-9.86%	+3.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.90%	16.25%	-5.35%

Volatility

SPAM vs. XSW - Volatility Comparison

Themes Cybersecurity ETF (SPAM) has a higher volatility of 12.02% compared to SPDR S&P Software & Services ETF (XSW) at 11.39%. This indicates that SPAM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XSW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SPAM	XSW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.02%	11.39%	+0.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.86%	23.81%	-0.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.44%	28.87%	-1.43%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.76%	28.89%	-4.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.76%	26.30%	-1.54%

SPAM vs. XSW - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

SPAM vs. XSW - Dividend Comparison

SPAM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.40%, more than XSW's 0.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
SPAM Themes Cybersecurity ETF	0.40%	0.49%	0.13%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XSW SPDR S&P Software & Services ETF	0.04%	0.06%	0.07%	0.20%	0.09%	0.13%	0.26%	0.12%	0.31%	0.46%	0.87%	0.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SPAM and XSW in my portfolio?

SPAM and XSW have a correlation of 0.82, 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 XSW?

SPAM has higher volatility (12.02%) compared to XSW (11.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SPAM dropped -24.02% vs XSW's -45.38%.

Which ETF is better, SPAM or XSW?

On 1-year performance, SPAM leads with 19.19% vs -10.76% for XSW. Both ETFs have the same 0.35% expense ratio. On volatility, XSW has been the lower-risk option at 11.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SPAM or XSW?

Over the 1-year period, SPAM has performed better with a 19.19% return vs -10.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SPAM or XSW?

SPAM and XSW have the same expense ratio: 0.35% per year.

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

SPAM has the higher dividend yield at 0.40%, compared with 0.04% for XSW.

What is the main difference between SPAM and XSW?

SPAM tracks Solactive Cyber Security Index - Benchmark TR Net, while XSW tracks S&P Software & Services Select Industry Index. They also come from different issuers: Themes and State Street.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SPAM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.70 vs -0.37), 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.