Statistics · 2026 · ETFs
Thematic ETF Statistics (2026)
QTUM was the best-performing of 7 thematic ETFs over the past year, returning 50.1% with dividends reinvested, as of October 2, 2026. ITA returned -0.5%. The S&P 500 fund SPY returned 16.7%. The funds' median expense ratio is 0.58%, 6.1 times SPY's 0.0945%.
Key takeaways
- Over the past year QTUM returned 50.1% and ITA returned -0.5%, a gap of 50.5 points across 7 funds.
- Five-year returns ran from -3.8% to 26.7% a year, a 30.5-point spread across 7 funds, and 4 of 7 beat SPY’s 13.9%.
- The median expense ratio is 0.58%, which is 6.1 times SPY’s 0.0945% and 19.3 times VTI’s 0.03%.
- ARKK fell 77.1% from peak to trough (month-end prices; lows within a month are not captured), against 23.9% for SPY.
- Morningstar’s thematic fund research says “55% of funds failing to survive the 15-year period to mid-2024” (its global thematic universe, not these 7 funds).
Which thematic ETFs performed best?
QTUM led the group over one year at 50.1% with dividends reinvested, and CIBR followed at 38.3%. Over five years QTUM ranked first at 26.7% a year, and ARKK ranked last at -3.8%. The gap between best and worst is wide in every window.
Each return runs from a month-end close to the October 2, 2026 price and is annualized over the actual days: the one-year figure covers September 30, 2025 to October 2, 2026, so it will not match an issuer's month-end one-year return.
“Thematic” here is WealthyBud’s grouping, not a regulatory or Morningstar class. A fund belongs to the group when the research dataset tags it thematic-etf; the tag is assigned by hand, one fund at a time, and 7 funds carry it. A three-year figure needs 36 month-end prices and a five-year figure 60; no fund is excluded from any window, because every fund has at least 60 month-end prices.
1. One-year gap: 50.5 percentage points (n = 7)
QTUM returned 50.1% over the past year and ITA returned -0.5% (WealthyBud data · 7 thematic funds, total return · October 2, 2026). 1 of the 7 funds lost money: ITA.
2. QTUM led the three-year run at 49.3% a year
QTUM compounded at 49.3% a year over three years, ahead of CIBR at 32.5%. LIT came last at 8.8%, a spread of 40.5 points (WealthyBud data · 3-yr annualized total return, n = 7 · October 2, 2026).
3. Five-year spread: 30.5 points a year (n = 7)
QTUM returned 26.7% a year and ARKK returned -3.8% a year. 3 of the 7 funds had a negative five-year return: ARKK, BOTZ, and LIT (raw values: BOTZ -0.04%) (WealthyBud data · 5-yr annualized total return · October 2, 2026).
| Ticker | Fund | Expense ratio | 1-yr total return | 5-yr total return (ann.) | Volatility (ann.) | Trailing yield |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARKK | ARK Innovation ETF | 0.75% | 4.0% | -3.8% | 43.0% | 0.00% |
| BOTZ | Global X Robotics & Artificial Intelligence ETF | 0.68% | 2.2% | 0.0% | 26.8% | 0.49% |
| CIBR | First Trust Nasdaq Cybersecurity ETF | 0.58% | 38.3% | 17.0% | 23.7% | 0.38% |
| ITA | iShares U.S. Aerospace & Defense ETF | 0.37% | -0.5% | 15.7% | 19.7% | 0.27% |
| LIT | Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF | 0.75% | 22.6% | -2.5% | 31.1% | 0.73% |
| PAVE | Global X U.S. Infrastructure Development ETF | 0.47% | 14.0% | 17.0% | 22.9% | 0.80% |
| QTUM | Defiance Quantum ETF | 0.40% | 50.1% | 26.7% | 27.7% | 0.90% |
| SPY | State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust | 0.0945% | 16.7% | 13.9% | 15.7% | 0.99% |
How much do thematic ETFs cost?
Expense ratios range from 0.37% for ITA to 0.75% for LIT, with a median of 0.58%. On $10,000 that is $37 to $75 a year. The S&P 500 fund SPY charges 0.0945%. All fees are the issuers’ stated figures, not WealthyBud estimates.
4. ITA costs 0.37% and LIT costs 0.75%
The cheapest thematic fund is ITA, followed by QTUM at 0.40% and PAVE at 0.47%. The most expensive is LIT, tied with ARKK, which costs 2.0 times as much as ITA (WealthyBud data · issuer-verified expense ratios · October 2, 2026).
Compare major ETFs by fees and returns
How volatile are thematic ETFs?
ARKK was the most volatile thematic fund, with annualized volatility of 43.0%, against 19.7% for ITA. ARKK had the deepest drawdown at 77.1%, and CIBR the shallowest at 28.3% (month-end prices; lows within a month are not captured). Volatility measures how much monthly returns swing.
5. ARKK swung most: 43.0% annualized
ARKK had the highest volatility, followed by LIT at 31.1%. Volatility is the annualized standard deviation of monthly returns, using the last 60 complete monthly returns through September 30, 2026 for every fund (WealthyBud data · monthly returns per fund · October 2, 2026).
6. ARKK fell 77.1% peak to trough on month-end prices
ARKK had the deepest drawdown, LIT next at 59.9%. The shallowest was CIBR at 28.3%. Drawdown windows by fund: ARKK, BOTZ, CIBR, ITA, and LIT: 121 month-end prices from September 30, 2016; PAVE: 115 month-end prices from March 31, 2017; QTUM: 97 month-end prices from September 28, 2018; each window ends with the September 30, 2026 month-end and adds the October 2, 2026 price, lows within a month are not captured, and the dataset does not record when each low occurred (WealthyBud data · max drawdown · October 2, 2026).
How do thematic ETFs compare with the S&P 500?
Over five years, 4 of 7 thematic funds beat the S&P 500 fund SPY, which returned 13.9% a year. Over one year 3 of 7 beat it, and over three years 4 of 7 did. Results change with the window measured.
7. 4 of 7 funds beat the S&P 500 over five years
SPY returned 13.9% a year. The best thematic fund, QTUM, returned 26.7%. QTUM, PAVE, CIBR, and ITA beat the index; PAVE and CIBR are tied at 17.0% (WealthyBud data · 5-yr annualized total return vs SPY · October 2, 2026).
8. 3 of 7 beat the index over one year, 4 of 7 over three
SPY returned 16.7% over one year and 23.1% a year over three. QTUM, CIBR, and LIT beat it over one year (WealthyBud data · 1- and 3-yr total return vs SPY · October 2, 2026).
9. 7 of 7 thematic funds were more volatile than the index
SPY measured 15.7% and had a worst drawdown of 23.9%, and 7 of 7 thematic funds fell further (month-end prices; lows within a month are not captured) (WealthyBud data · volatility and drawdown vs SPY · October 2, 2026).
How widely do thematic ETF returns vary?
Best-minus-worst spreads were 50.5 points over one year, 40.5 over three years and 30.5 over five years, each across 7 funds. The 1-year spread was the widest. Each spread covers only a few funds, so a single fund can set either end of it.
10. Spreads: 50.5, 40.5 and 30.5 points over 1, 3 and 5 years
Each spread is the best fund minus the worst fund in that window, and the 5-year spread was the narrowest. A fund without enough history would be left out of a window; none is excluded here (WealthyBud data · best minus worst, n per window in the table · October 2, 2026).
| Window | Funds (n) | Best | Worst | Spread (points) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1-year | 7 | QTUM 50.1% | ITA -0.5% | 50.5 |
| 3-year | 7 | QTUM 49.3% | LIT 8.8% | 40.5 |
| 5-year | 7 | QTUM 26.7% | ARKK -3.8% | 30.5 |
11. ARKK fell 77.1% peak to trough on month-end prices
ARKK’s maximum drawdown was 77.1% (month-end prices; lows within a month are not captured), measured over 121 month-end prices from September 30, 2016 to September 30, 2026 plus the October 2, 2026 price. The dataset does not record when the low occurred.
12. Morningstar: 22% of thematic funds survived and outperformed global equities in the year to mid-2024; 9% over three years
Morningstar analyst Kenneth Lamont wrote in “The Thematic Fund Landscape in 7 Charts” (Oct. 22, 2024), “In the year to mid-2024, 22% of thematic funds survived and outperformed global equities.” The article adds that the figure drops to 9% over three years. Morningstar’s universe is thematic funds worldwide, so the figure does not describe the 7 funds on this page.
13. Morningstar: 55% of funds failed to survive the 15-year period to mid-2024
The same Morningstar article states, “High closure rates also contribute to poor ratios, with 55% of funds failing to survive the 15-year period to mid-2024.” It also reports that in the US, in the first half of 2024, closures outnumbered launches for the first time since 2008. All 7 funds here were open as of October 2, 2026, so closed funds are absent from the data.
14. Issuer pages show 50 holdings for ITA and 90 for QTUM
The iShares page for ITA lists “Number of Holdings 50 as of Oct 01, 2026”. The Defiance page for QTUM lists “Fund Holdings 90” under “Fund Details Data as of 10/01/2026”. Funds in the same group can hold very different numbers of securities.
Do thematic ETFs cost more than broad funds?
The median thematic ETF here charges 0.58%, which is 6.1 times the 0.0945% of SPY and 19.3 times the 0.03% of VTI. 7 of 7 funds cost more than SPY, and 7 cost more than VTI. This page does not test whether fees explain returns.
15. Median fee 0.58% is 6.1 times SPY and 19.3 times VTI
7 of 7 thematic funds charge more than SPY (0.0945%) and 7 charge more than VTI (0.03%). Even the cheapest, ITA, costs 3.9 times SPY. On $10,000 the median thematic fund costs $58 a year, against $9.45 for SPY and $3 for VTI (WealthyBud’s calculation from issuer expense ratios · October 2, 2026).
16. US thematic funds charge higher average fees than nonthematic funds, Morningstar says
The same Morningstar article states, “On average, both active and passive US thematic funds levy higher average management fees than their nonthematic counterparts.” These 7 funds all cost more than SPY and VTI. This page compares fees only; it does not test whether fees explain returns.
| Fund | Expense ratio | Multiple of SPY | Multiple of VTI | Cost per $10,000 a year |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ITA | 0.37% | 3.9x | 12.3x | $37.00 |
| LIT | 0.75% | 7.9x | 25.0x | $75.00 |
| Median of 7 thematic funds | 0.58% | 6.1x | 19.3x | $58.00 |
| SPY | 0.0945% | 1.0x | 3.2x | $9.45 |
| VTI | 0.03% | 0.3x | 1.0x | $3.00 |
What this means for investors
Price the premium. The median fund costs 6.1 times SPY. On $10,000 that is $58 against $9.45 a year.
Size for the drop. ARKK fell 77.1% at its worst on month-end prices (lows within a month are not captured). Size positions so a fall that large will not force a sale.
Check your overlap. For related reading, see technology ETF statistics and ETF statistics. For the crypto side of the AI theme, see AI crypto statistics.
Past returns are not forecasts. The figures above describe history only.
More ETFs statistics
Technology ETF Statistics (2026)
Technology ETFs compared — XLK, VGT, IYW, FTEC, IGV and QQQ fees, total returns, volatility and how concentrated they are.
View ResearchAI Crypto Statistics (2026)
AI crypto tokens by the numbers — sector market cap, the largest AI tokens, one-year returns, distance from highs and supply overhang.
View ResearchETF Statistics (2026)
Expense ratios and 1-year price returns across 28 tracked ETFs, computed from WealthyBud's fund dataset.
View HubMajor ETFs Compared
28 ETFs compared by expense ratio and returns.
View