TMAT vs. CRTC

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

TMAT (Main Thematic Innovation ETF) and CRTC (Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF) are both Technology Equities funds - TMAT tracks the MSCI ACWI Index while CRTC tracks the Solactive Whitney U.S. Critical Technologies Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, TMAT returned 18.36% vs 17.24% for CRTC. Their correlation of 0.80 means they have usually moved in the same direction. TMAT charges 1.49%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for CRTC.

Performance

TMAT vs. CRTC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Main Thematic Innovation ETF (TMAT) and Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF (CRTC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TMAT achieves a 13.29% return, which is significantly higher than CRTC's 9.47% return.

TMAT

• 1D: 2.29%
• 1M: -4.05%
• 6M: 15.14%
• YTD: 13.29%
• 1Y: 18.36%
• 3Y*: 23.09%
• 5Y*: 4.21%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 2.40%

CRTC

• 1D: 2.36%
• 1M: 3.10%
• 6M: 7.08%
• YTD: 9.47%
• 1Y: 17.24%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 20.10%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CRTC Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF	$249.56K	$623.71K	$501.58K
TMAT Main Thematic Innovation ETF	$1.51M	$950.56K	$631.95K

TMAT vs. CRTC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
TMAT Main Thematic Innovation ETF	13.29%	20.06%	27.20%	14.95%
CRTC Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF	9.47%	18.69%	18.05%	7.16%

Correlation

The correlation between TMAT and CRTC is 0.80, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2023	0.80

The correlation between TMAT and CRTC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

TMAT vs. CRTC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TMAT	CRTC
Technology	54.9%	39.6%
Industrials	22.7%	13.4%
Healthcare	9.6%	13.5%
Basic Materials	9.1%	3.0%
Communication Services	2.4%	14.0%
Financial Services	2.1%	0.1%
Utilities	2.0%	5.5%
Consumer Cyclical	1.4%	4.9%
Energy	0.3%	5.8%
Consumer Defensive	-	0.0%
Real Estate	-	0.1%

Return for Risk

TMAT vs. CRTC — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

TMAT

TMAT Risk / Return Rank: 27
TMAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
TMAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
TMAT Omega Ratio Rank: 26
TMAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
TMAT Martin Ratio Rank: 24

CRTC

CRTC Risk / Return Rank: 47
CRTC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
CRTC Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
CRTC Omega Ratio Rank: 44
CRTC Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
CRTC Martin Ratio Rank: 50

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

TMAT vs. CRTC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Main Thematic Innovation ETF (TMAT) and Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF (CRTC). 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.

	TMAT	CRTC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.67	1.24	-0.56
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.06	1.73	-0.66
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.22	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.85	1.91	-1.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.90	6.01	-4.11

TMAT vs. CRTC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMAT Sharpe Ratio is 0.67, which is lower than the CRTC Sharpe Ratio of 1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMAT and CRTC, 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

TMAT vs. CRTC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMAT drawdown since its inception was -58.55%, which is greater than CRTC's maximum drawdown of -19.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMAT and CRTC.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMAT	CRTC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.55%	-19.07%	-39.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.63%	-9.05%	-12.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-33.42%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-51.86%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.85%	-0.47%	-9.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.43%	-2.23%	-29.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.71%	2.88%	+6.83%

Volatility

TMAT vs. CRTC - Volatility Comparison

Main Thematic Innovation ETF (TMAT) has a higher volatility of 9.63% compared to Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF (CRTC) at 4.30%. This indicates that TMAT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CRTC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TMAT	CRTC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.63%	4.30%	+5.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.26%	11.00%	+10.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.48%	14.04%	+13.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	31.13%	15.82%	+15.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.83%	15.82%	+15.01%

TMAT vs. CRTC - Expense Ratio Comparison

TMAT has a 1.49% expense ratio, which is higher than CRTC's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

TMAT vs. CRTC - Dividend Comparison

TMAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%, less than CRTC's 0.87% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CRTC Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF	0.87%	1.03%	1.13%	0.16%	0.00%	0.00%
TMAT Main Thematic Innovation ETF	0.02%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.34%	0.20%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TMAT and CRTC in my portfolio?

TMAT and CRTC have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TMAT or CRTC?

TMAT has higher volatility (9.63%) compared to CRTC (4.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMAT dropped -58.55% vs CRTC's -19.07%.

Which ETF is better, TMAT or CRTC?

On 1-year performance, TMAT leads with 18.36% vs 17.24% for CRTC. On fees, CRTC is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, CRTC has been the lower-risk option at 4.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TMAT or CRTC?

Over the 1-year period, TMAT has performed better with a 18.36% return vs 17.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TMAT or CRTC?

CRTC is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 1.49% for TMAT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TMAT or CRTC?

CRTC has the higher dividend yield at 0.87%, compared with 0.02% for TMAT.

What is the main difference between TMAT and CRTC?

TMAT tracks MSCI ACWI Index, while CRTC tracks Solactive Whitney U.S. Critical Technologies Index. They also come from different issuers: Main and Xtrackers. Their fees differ too: 1.49% for TMAT and 0.35% for CRTC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CRTC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.24 vs 0.67), 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.