THNR vs. LFSC

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

THNR (Amplify Weight Loss Drug & Treatment ETF) and LFSC (F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. THNR is passively managed, while LFSC is actively managed. Over the past year, THNR returned 9.10% vs 60.36% for LFSC. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. THNR charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.54%/yr for LFSC.

Performance

THNR vs. LFSC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Amplify Weight Loss Drug & Treatment ETF (THNR) and F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, THNR achieves a -5.20% return, which is significantly lower than LFSC's 2.73% return.

THNR

• 1D: -1.47%
• 1M: -2.91%
• YTD: -5.20%
• 6M: -3.73%
• 1Y: 9.10%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LFSC

• 1D: -2.62%
• 1M: -1.41%
• YTD: 2.73%
• 6M: 2.87%
• 1Y: 60.36%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

THNR vs. LFSC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
THNR Amplify Weight Loss Drug & Treatment ETF	-5.20%	13.65%	-9.98%
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF	2.73%	56.54%	-6.02%

Correlation

The correlation between THNR and LFSC is 0.54, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.54
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 1, 2024	0.55

The correlation between THNR and LFSC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

THNR vs. LFSC — Risk / Return Rank

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

THNR

THNR Risk / Return Rank: 16
THNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
THNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
THNR Omega Ratio Rank: 15
THNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
THNR Martin Ratio Rank: 17

LFSC

LFSC Risk / Return Rank: 68
LFSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
LFSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
LFSC Omega Ratio Rank: 62
LFSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
LFSC Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

THNR vs. LFSC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Amplify Weight Loss Drug & Treatment ETF (THNR) and F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC). 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.

	THNR	LFSC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.48	2.33	-1.86
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.81	3.25	-2.44
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	1.38	-0.29
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.76	3.94	-3.18
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	1.75	11.02	-9.28
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

THNR vs. LFSC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current THNR Sharpe Ratio is 0.48, which is lower than the LFSC Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of THNR and LFSC, 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

	THNR	LFSC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.48	2.33	-1.86
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.09	1.04	-1.13

Drawdowns

THNR vs. LFSC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum THNR drawdown since its inception was -32.51%, which is greater than LFSC's maximum drawdown of -29.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for THNR and LFSC.

Drawdown Indicators

	THNR	LFSC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.51%	-29.74%	-2.77%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.06%	-16.25%	+4.19%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.00%	-4.60%	-8.40%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.24%	-7.83%	-4.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.26%	5.81%	-0.55%

Volatility

THNR vs. LFSC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Amplify Weight Loss Drug & Treatment ETF (THNR) is 5.16%, while F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) has a volatility of 7.47%. This indicates that THNR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LFSC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	THNR	LFSC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.16%	7.47%	-2.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.55%	18.58%	-5.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.15%	26.08%	-6.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.37%	28.92%	-9.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.37%	28.92%	-9.55%

THNR vs. LFSC - Expense Ratio Comparison

THNR has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than LFSC's 0.54% expense ratio.

Dividends

THNR vs. LFSC - Dividend Comparison

THNR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.73%, while LFSC has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
THNR Amplify Weight Loss Drug & Treatment ETF	1.73%	1.64%	0.98%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both THNR and LFSC in my portfolio?

THNR and LFSC have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, THNR or LFSC?

LFSC has higher volatility (7.47%) compared to THNR (5.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, THNR dropped -32.51% vs LFSC's -29.74%.

Which ETF is better, THNR or LFSC?

On 1-year performance, LFSC leads with 60.36% vs 9.10% for THNR. On fees, LFSC is cheaper at 0.54% per year. On volatility, THNR has been the lower-risk option at 5.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, THNR or LFSC?

Over the 1-year period, LFSC has performed better with a 60.36% return vs 9.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, THNR or LFSC?

LFSC is cheaper with a 0.54% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for THNR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, THNR or LFSC?

THNR has the higher dividend yield at 1.73%, compared with 0.00% for LFSC.

What is the main difference between THNR and LFSC?

They also come from different issuers: Amplify and F/m Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for THNR and 0.54% for LFSC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LFSC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 vs 0.48), 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.