XHS vs. CNCR
XHS (SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF) and CNCR (Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - XHS tracks the S&P Health Care Services Select Industry Index while CNCR tracks the Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy Index. Both are passively managed. XHS charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for CNCR.
Performance
XHS vs. CNCR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
XHS
- 1D
- 2.24%
- 1M
- 7.26%
- YTD
- 8.70%
- 6M
- 7.47%
- 1Y
- 19.37%
- 3Y*
- 9.27%
- 5Y*
- 0.88%
- 10Y*
- 7.57%
CNCR
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XHS vs. CNCR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
XHS SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF | 9.31% |
CNCR Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy ETF | 0.00% |
XHS vs. CNCR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XHS
CNCR
Healthcare
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Healthcare
XHS
CNCR
Financial Services
XHS
CNCR
Basic Materials
XHS
-
CNCR
-
Communication Services
XHS
-
CNCR
-
Consumer Cyclical
XHS
-
CNCR
-
Consumer Defensive
XHS
-
CNCR
-
Energy
XHS
-
CNCR
-
Industrials
XHS
-
CNCR
-
Real Estate
XHS
-
CNCR
-
Technology
XHS
-
CNCR
-
Utilities
XHS
-
CNCR
-
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
XHS vs. CNCR — Risk / Return Rank
XHS
CNCR
XHS vs. CNCR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF (XHS) and Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy ETF (CNCR). 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 | CNCR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.20 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.62 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.48 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XHS | CNCR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.10 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.04 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.34 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.57 | — | — |
Drawdowns
XHS vs. CNCR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XHS drawdown since its inception was -39.32%, which is greater than CNCR's maximum drawdown of 0.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XHS and CNCR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XHS | CNCR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -39.32% | 0.00% | -39.32% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.99% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.81% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -32.62% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.32% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.19% | 0.00% | -10.19% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.33% | — | — |
Volatility
XHS vs. CNCR - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XHS | CNCR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.65% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.01% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.68% | 0.00% | +17.68% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.12% | 0.00% | +21.12% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.41% | 0.00% | +22.41% |
XHS vs. CNCR - Expense Ratio Comparison
XHS has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than CNCR's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
XHS vs. CNCR - Dividend Comparison
XHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.25%, while CNCR has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNCR Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 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
On fees, XHS is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XHS is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for CNCR.
XHS has the higher dividend yield at 0.25%, compared with 0.00% for CNCR.
XHS tracks S&P Health Care Services Select Industry Index, while CNCR tracks Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Exchange Traded Concepts. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for XHS and 0.79% for CNCR.
Find the right allocation for XHS and CNCR
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer