AGNG vs. FHLC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AGNG (Global X Aging Population ETF) and FHLC (Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - AGNG tracks the Indxx Aging Population Thematic Index while FHLC tracks the MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, AGNG returned 8.76%/yr vs 9.14%/yr for FHLC. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AGNG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for FHLC.

Performance

AGNG vs. FHLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Aging Population ETF (AGNG) and Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AGNG achieves a -4.79% return, which is significantly lower than FHLC's -3.90% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with AGNG having a 8.76% annualized return and FHLC not far ahead at 9.14%.

AGNG

• 1D: 0.41%
• 1M: -2.10%
• YTD: -4.79%
• 6M: -5.36%
• 1Y: 9.81%
• 3Y*: 8.25%
• 5Y*: 3.96%
• 10Y*: 8.76%

FHLC

• 1D: 0.82%
• 1M: 1.50%
• YTD: -3.90%
• 6M: -4.11%
• 1Y: 14.43%
• 3Y*: 6.14%
• 5Y*: 4.50%
• 10Y*: 9.14%

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

AGNG vs. FHLC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AGNG Global X Aging Population ETF	-4.79%	20.01%	7.03%	9.65%	-8.61%	3.91%	18.96%	25.24%	-1.45%	28.17%
FHLC Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF	-3.90%	15.42%	2.48%	2.58%	-5.55%	20.39%	18.13%	21.94%	4.71%	23.34%

Correlation

The correlation between AGNG and FHLC is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.81
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.79
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.75
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2016	0.75

The correlation between AGNG and FHLC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

AGNG vs. FHLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AGNG	FHLC
Healthcare	90.8%	99.6%
Real Estate	9.2%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	0.1%
Industrials	-	0.0%
Technology	-	0.0%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

AGNG vs. FHLC — Risk / Return Rank

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

AGNG

AGNG Risk / Return Rank: 20
AGNG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
AGNG Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
AGNG Omega Ratio Rank: 20
AGNG Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
AGNG Martin Ratio Rank: 20

FHLC

FHLC Risk / Return Rank: 27
FHLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
FHLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
FHLC Omega Ratio Rank: 26
FHLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
FHLC Martin Ratio Rank: 26

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.

AGNG vs. FHLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Aging Population ETF (AGNG) and Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC). 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.

	AGNG	FHLC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.72	1.01	-0.29
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.12	1.58	-0.46
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.18	-0.05
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.86	1.40	-0.54
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	2.34	3.52	-1.17
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AGNG vs. FHLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AGNG Sharpe Ratio is 0.72, which is comparable to the FHLC Sharpe Ratio of 1.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AGNG and FHLC, 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

	AGNG	FHLC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.72	1.01	-0.29
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.26	0.30	-0.04
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.51	0.55	-0.03
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.53	0.61	-0.08

Drawdowns

AGNG vs. FHLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AGNG drawdown since its inception was -30.58%, which is greater than FHLC's maximum drawdown of -28.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AGNG and FHLC.

Drawdown Indicators

	AGNG	FHLC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-30.58%	-28.76%	-1.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.45%	-10.38%	-1.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.48%	-16.87%	+2.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.66%	-17.73%	-7.93%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-30.58%	-28.76%	-1.82%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.09%	-6.96%	-4.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.95%	-5.19%	-0.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.20%	4.11%	+0.09%

Volatility

AGNG vs. FHLC - Volatility Comparison

Global X Aging Population ETF (AGNG) and Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) have volatilities of 3.87% and 4.05%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AGNG	FHLC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.87%	4.05%	-0.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.00%	10.11%	-0.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.62%	14.33%	-0.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.22%	14.97%	+0.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.13%	16.81%	+0.32%

AGNG vs. FHLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

AGNG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FHLC's 0.08% expense ratio.

Dividends

AGNG vs. FHLC - Dividend Comparison

AGNG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.92%, less than FHLC's 1.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AGNG Global X Aging Population ETF	0.92%	0.88%	0.83%	0.96%	0.49%	0.72%	0.36%	0.83%	1.00%	1.04%	0.45%	0.00%
FHLC Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF	1.43%	1.40%	1.51%	1.40%	1.30%	1.16%	1.45%	1.18%	1.38%	1.38%	1.40%	2.07%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AGNG and FHLC in my portfolio?

AGNG and FHLC have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AGNG or FHLC?

FHLC has higher volatility (4.05%) compared to AGNG (3.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AGNG dropped -30.58% vs FHLC's -28.76%.

Which ETF is better, AGNG or FHLC?

On 10-year performance, FHLC leads with 9.14% vs 8.76% for AGNG. On fees, FHLC is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, AGNG has been the lower-risk option at 3.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AGNG or FHLC?

Over the 10-year period, FHLC has performed better with a 9.14% return vs 8.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AGNG or FHLC?

FHLC is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for AGNG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AGNG or FHLC?

FHLC has the higher dividend yield at 1.43%, compared with 0.92% for AGNG.

What is the main difference between AGNG and FHLC?

AGNG tracks Indxx Aging Population Thematic Index, while FHLC tracks MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for AGNG and 0.08% for FHLC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FHLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.01 vs 0.72), 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.