XHS vs. CANC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XHS (SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF) and CANC (Tema Oncology ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. XHS is passively managed, while CANC is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, XHS returned 8.47%/yr vs 107.76%/yr for CANC. At a 0.39 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XHS charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for CANC.

Performance

XHS vs. CANC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF (XHS) and Tema Oncology ETF (CANC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XHS achieves a 6.32% return, which is significantly higher than CANC's 4.82% return.

XHS

• 1D: 0.28%
• 1M: 2.77%
• YTD: 6.32%
• 6M: 5.39%
• 1Y: 16.58%
• 3Y*: 8.47%
• 5Y*: 0.44%
• 10Y*: 7.46%

CANC

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: -3.73%
• YTD: 4.82%
• 6M: 3.86%
• 1Y: 47.37%
• 3Y*: 107.76%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XHS vs. CANC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
XHS SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF	6.32%	18.83%	1.76%	5.15%	-19.87%	1.84%
CANC Tema Oncology ETF	4.82%	42.92%	-5.37%	510.51%	-85.34%	-51.82%

Correlation

The correlation between XHS and CANC 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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.48
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2021	0.39

The correlation between XHS and CANC shifts across timeframes, from 0.34 (1 year) to 0.48 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XHS vs. CANC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XHS	CANC
Healthcare	98.0%	100.0%
Financial Services	2.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

XHS vs. CANC — Risk / Return Rank

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

XHS

XHS Risk / Return Rank: 26
XHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
XHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
XHS Omega Ratio Rank: 26
XHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
XHS Martin Ratio Rank: 27

CANC

CANC Risk / Return Rank: 69
CANC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
CANC Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
CANC Omega Ratio Rank: 54
CANC Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
CANC 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.

XHS vs. CANC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF (XHS) and Tema Oncology ETF (CANC). 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.

	XHS	CANC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.95	2.06	-1.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.39	2.96	-1.57
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.34	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.39	5.49	-4.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.83	14.62	-10.79
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XHS vs. CANC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XHS Sharpe Ratio is 0.95, which is lower than the CANC Sharpe Ratio of 2.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XHS and CANC, 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

	XHS	CANC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.95	2.06	-1.11
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.02	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.33	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.57	-0.04	+0.60

Drawdowns

XHS vs. CANC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XHS drawdown since its inception was -39.32%, smaller than the maximum CANC drawdown of -97.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XHS and CANC.

Drawdown Indicators

	XHS	CANC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.32%	-97.53%	+58.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.99%	-8.67%	-3.32%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.81%	-30.27%	+12.46%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-32.62%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.32%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.78%	-56.55%	+54.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.20%	-73.19%	+62.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.33%	3.25%	+1.08%

Volatility

XHS vs. CANC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF (XHS) is 4.80%, while Tema Oncology ETF (CANC) has a volatility of 6.26%. This indicates that XHS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CANC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XHS	CANC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.80%	6.26%	-1.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.86%	16.69%	-4.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.56%	23.11%	-5.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.10%	280.27%	-259.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.40%	280.27%	-257.87%

XHS vs. CANC - Expense Ratio Comparison

XHS has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than CANC's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

XHS vs. CANC - Dividend Comparison

XHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.25%, more than CANC's 0.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CANC Tema Oncology ETF	0.05%	0.06%	3.00%	0.56%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XHS SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF	0.25%	0.27%	0.38%	0.23%	0.19%	0.20%	0.23%	2.37%	0.34%	0.22%	0.28%	0.93%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XHS and CANC in my portfolio?

XHS and CANC 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.

Which is riskier, XHS or CANC?

CANC has higher volatility (6.26%) compared to XHS (4.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XHS dropped -39.32% vs CANC's -97.53%.

Which ETF is better, XHS or CANC?

On 3-year performance, CANC leads with 107.76% vs 8.47% for XHS. On fees, XHS is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, XHS has been the lower-risk option at 4.80%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XHS or CANC?

Over the 3-year period, CANC has performed better with a 107.76% return vs 8.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XHS or CANC?

XHS is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for CANC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XHS or CANC?

XHS has the higher dividend yield at 0.25%, compared with 0.05% for CANC.

What is the main difference between XHS and CANC?

They also come from different issuers: State Street and Tema. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for XHS and 0.75% for CANC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CANC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.06 vs 0.95), 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.