BMED vs. GSKH

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

BMED (Future Health ETF) and GSKH (GSK plc ADRhedged ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. BMED is actively managed, while GSKH is passively managed. Over the past year, BMED returned 19.13% vs 40.20% for GSKH. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BMED charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for GSKH.

Performance

BMED vs. GSKH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Future Health ETF (BMED) and GSK plc ADRhedged ETF (GSKH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BMED achieves a -2.75% return, which is significantly lower than GSKH's 8.45% return.

BMED

• 1D: 1.86%
• 1M: 5.01%
• YTD: -2.75%
• 6M: -4.38%
• 1Y: 19.13%
• 3Y*: 6.27%
• 5Y*: -0.76%
• 10Y*: —

GSKH

• 1D: -1.32%
• 1M: 1.57%
• YTD: 8.45%
• 6M: 8.63%
• 1Y: 40.20%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BMED vs. GSKH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BMED Future Health ETF	-2.75%	19.23%
GSKH GSK plc ADRhedged ETF	8.45%	36.51%

Correlation

The correlation between BMED and GSKH is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.48
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 7, 2025	0.46

Return for Risk

BMED vs. GSKH — Risk / Return Rank

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

BMED

BMED Risk / Return Rank: 34
BMED Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
BMED Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
BMED Omega Ratio Rank: 36
BMED Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
BMED Martin Ratio Rank: 25

GSKH

GSKH Risk / Return Rank: 50
GSKH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
GSKH Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
GSKH Omega Ratio Rank: 53
GSKH Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
GSKH Martin Ratio Rank: 40

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.

BMED vs. GSKH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Future Health ETF (BMED) and GSK plc ADRhedged ETF (GSKH). 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.

	BMED	GSKH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.25	1.54	-0.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.85	2.31	-0.46
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.29	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.29	2.18	-0.88
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.02	5.67	-2.66

BMED vs. GSKH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BMED Sharpe Ratio is 1.25, which is comparable to the GSKH Sharpe Ratio of 1.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BMED and GSKH, 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

BMED vs. GSKH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BMED drawdown since its inception was -36.44%, which is greater than GSKH's maximum drawdown of -18.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BMED and GSKH.

Drawdown Indicators

	BMED	GSKH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.44%	-18.54%	-17.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.85%	-18.54%	+3.69%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.12%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-33.90%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.88%	-12.79%	+3.91%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.00%	-5.88%	-13.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.35%	7.11%	-0.76%

Volatility

BMED vs. GSKH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Future Health ETF (BMED) is 5.02%, while GSK plc ADRhedged ETF (GSKH) has a volatility of 7.03%. This indicates that BMED experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSKH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BMED	GSKH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.02%	7.03%	-2.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.50%	18.72%	-7.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.51%	26.18%	-10.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.47%	26.94%	-9.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.75%	26.94%	-9.19%

BMED vs. GSKH - Expense Ratio Comparison

BMED has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than GSKH's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

BMED vs. GSKH - Dividend Comparison

BMED's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.28%, less than GSKH's 2.86% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BMED Future Health ETF	0.28%	0.00%	0.00%	0.03%
GSKH GSK plc ADRhedged ETF	2.86%	1.15%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BMED and GSKH in my portfolio?

BMED and GSKH have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BMED or GSKH?

GSKH has higher volatility (7.03%) compared to BMED (5.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BMED dropped -36.44% vs GSKH's -18.54%.

Which ETF is better, BMED or GSKH?

On 1-year performance, GSKH leads with 40.20% vs 19.13% for BMED. On fees, GSKH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, BMED has been the lower-risk option at 5.02%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BMED or GSKH?

Over the 1-year period, GSKH has performed better with a 40.20% return vs 19.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BMED or GSKH?

GSKH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for BMED.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BMED or GSKH?

GSKH has the higher dividend yield at 2.86%, compared with 0.28% for BMED.

What is the main difference between BMED and GSKH?

They also come from different issuers: BlackRock and ADRhedged. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for BMED and 0.19% for GSKH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GSKH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.54 vs 1.25), 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.