AGNG vs. MHIP
AGNG (Global X Aging Population ETF) and MHIP (Milliman Healthcare Inflation Plus ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. AGNG is passively managed, while MHIP is actively managed. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AGNG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for MHIP.
Performance
AGNG vs. MHIP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
AGNG
- 1D
- -0.33%
- 1M
- 6.64%
- 6M
- 0.13%
- YTD
- 2.71%
- 1Y
- 15.02%
- 3Y*
- 10.53%
- 5Y*
- 4.82%
- 10Y*
- 9.96%
MHIP
- 1D
- -0.29%
- 1M
- 1.91%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AGNG vs. MHIP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
AGNG Global X Aging Population ETF | 1.15% |
MHIP Milliman Healthcare Inflation Plus ETF | -0.15% |
Correlation
The correlation between AGNG and MHIP is 0.67, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 21, 2026 | 0.67 |
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
AGNG vs. MHIP — Risk / Return Rank
AGNG
MHIP
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
AGNG vs. MHIP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Aging Population ETF (AGNG) and Milliman Healthcare Inflation Plus ETF (MHIP). 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.
| AGNG | MHIP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.19 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.32 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.10 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AGNG vs. MHIP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AGNG drawdown since its inception was -30.58%, which is greater than MHIP's maximum drawdown of -3.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AGNG and MHIP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AGNG | MHIP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -30.58% | -3.09% | -27.49% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.45% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.48% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.66% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -30.58% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.09% | -1.76% | -2.33% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.96% | -1.29% | -4.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.86% | — | — |
Volatility
AGNG vs. MHIP - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AGNG | MHIP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.86% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.01% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.10% | 11.46% | +2.64% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.33% | 11.46% | +3.87% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.20% | 11.46% | +5.74% |
AGNG vs. MHIP - Expense Ratio Comparison
AGNG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than MHIP's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
AGNG vs. MHIP - Dividend Comparison
AGNG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.89%, while MHIP has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AGNG Global X Aging Population ETF | 0.89% | 0.88% | 0.83% | 0.96% | 0.49% | 0.72% | 0.36% | 0.83% | 1.00% | 1.04% | 0.45% |
MHIP Milliman Healthcare Inflation Plus ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AGNG and MHIP have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, AGNG is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
AGNG is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for MHIP.
AGNG has the higher dividend yield at 0.89%, compared with 0.00% for MHIP.
They also come from different issuers: Global X and Milliman. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for AGNG and 0.55% for MHIP.
Find the right allocation for AGNG and MHIP
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