BMED vs. UNHW

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

BMED (Future Health ETF) and UNHW (Roundhill UNH WeeklyPay ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BMED is a Health & Biotech Equities fund actively managed by BlackRock, while UNHW is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill Investments. Both are actively managed. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BMED charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for UNHW.

Performance

BMED vs. UNHW - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BMED achieves a -5.19% return, which is significantly lower than UNHW's 22.06% return.

BMED

• 1D: 1.98%
• 1M: 2.19%
• YTD: -5.19%
• 6M: -5.93%
• 1Y: 17.59%
• 3Y*: 5.91%
• 5Y*: -0.08%
• 10Y*: —

UNHW

• 1D: 6.07%
• 1M: 10.36%
• YTD: 22.06%
• 6M: 20.64%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BMED vs. UNHW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BMED Future Health ETF	-5.19%	-0.82%
UNHW Roundhill UNH WeeklyPay ETF	22.06%	-3.02%

Correlation

The correlation between BMED and UNHW is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 4, 2025	0.20

BMED vs. UNHW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BMED	UNHW
Healthcare	100.0%	33.4%
Consumer Defensive	1.5%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

BMED vs. UNHW — Risk / Return Rank

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

BMED

BMED Risk / Return Rank: 29
BMED Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
BMED Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
BMED Omega Ratio Rank: 31
BMED Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
BMED Martin Ratio Rank: 24

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. UNHW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Future Health ETF (BMED) and Roundhill UNH WeeklyPay ETF (UNHW). 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.

	BMED	UNHW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.16	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.73	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.19	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.00	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BMED	UNHW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.16	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.00	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.12	0.81	-0.69

Drawdowns

BMED vs. UNHW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BMED drawdown since its inception was -36.44%, which is greater than UNHW's maximum drawdown of -32.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BMED and UNHW.

Drawdown Indicators

	BMED	UNHW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.44%	-32.28%	-4.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.85%	—	—
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	-11.17%	-1.42%	-9.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-19.08%	-12.40%	-6.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.88%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BMED	UNHW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.74%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.23%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.23%	50.32%	-35.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.43%	50.32%	-32.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.77%	50.32%	-32.55%

BMED vs. UNHW - Expense Ratio Comparison

BMED has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than UNHW's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

BMED vs. UNHW - Dividend Comparison

BMED has not paid dividends to shareholders, while UNHW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 16.34%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BMED Future Health ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.03%
UNHW Roundhill UNH WeeklyPay ETF	16.34%	2.81%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BMED and UNHW in my portfolio?

BMED and UNHW have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BMED or UNHW?

On fees, BMED is cheaper at 0.85% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BMED or UNHW?

BMED is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for UNHW.

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

UNHW has the higher dividend yield at 16.34%, compared with 0.00% for BMED.

What is the main difference between BMED and UNHW?

BMED is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while UNHW is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: BlackRock and Roundhill Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for BMED and 0.99% for UNHW.