BBH vs. IBBQ

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BBH (VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF) and IBBQ (Invesco Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - BBH tracks the MVIS US Listed Biotech 25 Index while IBBQ tracks the NASDAQ / Biotechnology. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BBH returned -0.32%/yr vs 4.77%/yr for IBBQ. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BBH charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.00%/yr for IBBQ.

Performance

BBH vs. IBBQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF (BBH) and Invesco Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF (IBBQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BBH achieves a 0.83% return, which is significantly lower than IBBQ's 8.67% return.

BBH

• 1D: 0.77%
• 1M: 3.29%
• YTD: 0.83%
• 6M: -0.86%
• 1Y: 27.19%
• 3Y*: 7.34%
• 5Y*: -0.32%
• 10Y*: 7.27%

IBBQ

• 1D: 0.93%
• 1M: 5.09%
• YTD: 8.67%
• 6M: 7.00%
• 1Y: 48.86%
• 3Y*: 15.18%
• 5Y*: 4.77%
• 10Y*: —

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

BBH vs. IBBQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BBH VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF	0.83%	21.18%	-4.29%	3.94%	-15.25%	-5.55%
IBBQ Invesco Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF	8.67%	33.32%	-0.63%	4.73%	-10.41%	-6.24%

Correlation

The correlation between BBH and IBBQ is 0.91, 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	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 11, 2021	0.92

The correlation between BBH and IBBQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

BBH vs. IBBQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BBH	IBBQ
Healthcare	100.0%	99.9%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	0.1%
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

BBH vs. IBBQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

BBH

BBH Risk / Return Rank: 44
BBH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
BBH Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
BBH Omega Ratio Rank: 39
BBH Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
BBH Martin Ratio Rank: 41

IBBQ

IBBQ Risk / Return Rank: 83
IBBQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
IBBQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
IBBQ Omega Ratio Rank: 71
IBBQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
IBBQ Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

BBH vs. IBBQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF (BBH) and Invesco Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF (IBBQ). 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.

	BBH	IBBQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.42	2.45	-1.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.09	3.36	-1.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.40	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.59	5.89	-3.30
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.23	18.75	-12.52

BBH vs. IBBQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BBH Sharpe Ratio is 1.42, which is lower than the IBBQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BBH and IBBQ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BBH vs. IBBQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BBH drawdown since its inception was -72.70%, which is greater than IBBQ's maximum drawdown of -37.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BBH and IBBQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	BBH	IBBQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-72.70%	-37.94%	-34.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.55%	-8.34%	-2.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.74%	-23.66%	+0.92%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.86%	-37.94%	-1.92%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.86%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.46%	0.00%	-11.46%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.73%	-16.66%	-4.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.37%	2.61%	+1.76%

Volatility

BBH vs. IBBQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF (BBH) is 6.15%, while Invesco Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF (IBBQ) has a volatility of 6.82%. This indicates that BBH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IBBQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BBH	IBBQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.15%	6.82%	-0.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.59%	15.72%	-1.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.30%	20.03%	-0.73%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.44%	21.92%	-0.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.12%	21.87%	+0.25%

BBH vs. IBBQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

BBH has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than IBBQ's 0.00% expense ratio.

Dividends

BBH vs. IBBQ - Dividend Comparison

BBH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.50%, less than IBBQ's 0.83% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BBH VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF	0.50%	0.51%	0.80%	0.43%	0.47%	0.21%	0.36%	0.34%	0.50%	0.55%	0.30%	0.27%
IBBQ Invesco Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF	0.83%	0.90%	1.14%	0.81%	0.76%	0.63%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BBH and IBBQ in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, BBH and IBBQ move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, BBH or IBBQ?

IBBQ has higher volatility (6.82%) compared to BBH (6.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BBH dropped -72.70% vs IBBQ's -37.94%.

Which ETF is better, BBH or IBBQ?

On 5-year performance, IBBQ leads with 4.77% vs -0.32% for BBH. On fees, IBBQ is cheaper at 0.00% per year. On volatility, BBH has been the lower-risk option at 6.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BBH or IBBQ?

Over the 5-year period, IBBQ has performed better with a 4.77% return vs -0.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BBH or IBBQ?

IBBQ is cheaper with a 0.00% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for BBH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BBH or IBBQ?

IBBQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.83%, compared with 0.50% for BBH.

What is the main difference between BBH and IBBQ?

BBH tracks MVIS US Listed Biotech 25 Index, while IBBQ tracks NASDAQ / Biotechnology. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for BBH and 0.00% for IBBQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBBQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.45 vs 1.42), 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.