THMZ vs. SPGM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

THMZ (Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF) and SPGM (SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF) are both Global Equities funds. THMZ is actively managed, while SPGM is passively managed. Over the past year, THMZ returned 15.10% vs 31.70% for SPGM. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. THMZ charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for SPGM.

Performance

THMZ vs. SPGM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF (THMZ) and SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF (SPGM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, THMZ achieves a 3.26% return, which is significantly lower than SPGM's 12.88% return.

THMZ

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: 4.63%
• YTD: 3.26%
• 6M: 3.17%
• 1Y: 15.10%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SPGM

• 1D: -0.87%
• 1M: 4.94%
• YTD: 12.88%
• 6M: 13.62%
• 1Y: 31.70%
• 3Y*: 21.46%
• 5Y*: 11.48%
• 10Y*: 12.95%

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

THMZ vs. SPGM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
THMZ Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF	3.26%	31.76%
SPGM SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF	12.88%	39.35%

Correlation

The correlation between THMZ and SPGM is 0.93, 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	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 8, 2025	0.92

The correlation between THMZ and SPGM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

THMZ vs. SPGM — Risk / Return Rank

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

THMZ

THMZ Risk / Return Rank: 26
THMZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
THMZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
THMZ Omega Ratio Rank: 27
THMZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
THMZ Martin Ratio Rank: 26

SPGM

SPGM Risk / Return Rank: 73
SPGM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
SPGM Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
SPGM Omega Ratio Rank: 74
SPGM Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
SPGM Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

THMZ vs. SPGM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF (THMZ) and SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF (SPGM). 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.

	THMZ	SPGM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.97	2.47	-1.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.45	3.39	-1.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.45	-0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.95	3.35	-2.40
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.41	15.14	-11.73
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

THMZ vs. SPGM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current THMZ Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is lower than the SPGM Sharpe Ratio of 2.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of THMZ and SPGM, 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

	THMZ	SPGM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.97	2.47	-1.50
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.72	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.74	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.64	0.66	+0.98

Drawdowns

THMZ vs. SPGM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum THMZ drawdown since its inception was -15.99%, smaller than the maximum SPGM drawdown of -33.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for THMZ and SPGM.

Drawdown Indicators

	THMZ	SPGM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.99%	-33.97%	+17.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.99%	-9.50%	-6.49%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.90%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-25.93%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-33.97%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.68%	-0.87%	+0.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.60%	-4.81%	+2.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.43%	2.10%	+2.33%

Volatility

THMZ vs. SPGM - Volatility Comparison

Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF (THMZ) has a higher volatility of 4.23% compared to SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF (SPGM) at 3.92%. This indicates that THMZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SPGM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	THMZ	SPGM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.23%	3.92%	+0.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.53%	10.35%	+2.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.58%	12.88%	+2.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.72%	16.03%	+2.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.72%	17.57%	+1.15%

THMZ vs. SPGM - Expense Ratio Comparison

THMZ has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than SPGM's 0.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

THMZ vs. SPGM - Dividend Comparison

THMZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.41%, less than SPGM's 1.79% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
SPGM SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF	1.79%	1.89%	1.98%	2.09%	2.37%	1.94%	1.45%	2.46%	1.89%	2.29%	1.87%	3.70%
THMZ Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF	0.41%	0.30%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both THMZ and SPGM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, THMZ and SPGM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, THMZ or SPGM?

THMZ has higher volatility (4.23%) compared to SPGM (3.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, THMZ dropped -15.99% vs SPGM's -33.97%.

Which ETF is better, THMZ or SPGM?

On 1-year performance, SPGM leads with 31.70% vs 15.10% for THMZ. On fees, SPGM is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, SPGM has been the lower-risk option at 3.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, THMZ or SPGM?

Over the 1-year period, SPGM has performed better with a 31.70% return vs 15.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, THMZ or SPGM?

SPGM is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for THMZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, THMZ or SPGM?

SPGM has the higher dividend yield at 1.79%, compared with 0.41% for THMZ.

What is the main difference between THMZ and SPGM?

They also come from different issuers: Lazard and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for THMZ and 0.09% for SPGM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SPGM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 0.97), 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.