FHLC vs. AGNG
FHLC (Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF) and AGNG (Global X Aging Population ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - FHLC tracks the MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index while AGNG tracks the Indxx Aging Population Thematic Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FHLC returned 10.02%/yr vs 9.37%/yr for AGNG. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FHLC charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for AGNG.
Performance
FHLC vs. AGNG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FHLC achieves a 0.11% return, which is significantly higher than AGNG's -2.65% return. Over the past 10 years, FHLC has outperformed AGNG with an annualized return of 10.02%, while AGNG has yielded a comparatively lower 9.37% annualized return.
FHLC
- 1D
- 1.34%
- 1M
- 2.70%
- YTD
- 0.11%
- 6M
- -0.37%
- 1Y
- 19.38%
- 3Y*
- 7.06%
- 5Y*
- 4.57%
- 10Y*
- 10.02%
AGNG
- 1D
- 0.89%
- 1M
- -2.46%
- YTD
- -2.65%
- 6M
- -3.59%
- 1Y
- 12.53%
- 3Y*
- 8.93%
- 5Y*
- 3.41%
- 10Y*
- 9.37%
FHLC vs. AGNG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FHLC Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF | 0.11% | 15.42% | 2.48% | 2.58% | -5.55% | 20.39% | 18.13% | 21.94% | 4.71% | 23.34% |
AGNG Global X Aging Population ETF | -2.65% | 20.01% | 7.03% | 9.65% | -8.61% | 3.91% | 18.96% | 25.24% | -1.45% | 28.17% |
Correlation
The correlation between FHLC and AGNG is 0.82, 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 | 0.82 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.80 |
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 10, 2016 | 0.75 |
The correlation between FHLC and AGNG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.
FHLC vs. AGNG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FHLC
AGNG
Healthcare
Technology
-
Financial Services
-
Industrials
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
-
Healthcare
FHLC
AGNG
Technology
FHLC
AGNG
-
Financial Services
FHLC
AGNG
-
Industrials
FHLC
AGNG
-
Basic Materials
FHLC
-
AGNG
-
Communication Services
FHLC
-
AGNG
-
Consumer Cyclical
FHLC
-
AGNG
-
Consumer Defensive
FHLC
-
AGNG
-
Energy
FHLC
-
AGNG
-
Real Estate
FHLC
-
AGNG
Utilities
FHLC
-
AGNG
-
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
FHLC vs. AGNG — Risk / Return Rank
FHLC
AGNG
FHLC vs. AGNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) and Global X Aging Population ETF (AGNG). 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.
| FHLC | AGNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.40 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.63 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | 1.17 | +0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.88 | 1.10 | +0.78 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.64 | 2.68 | +1.95 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FHLC vs. AGNG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FHLC drawdown since its inception was -28.76%, smaller than the maximum AGNG drawdown of -30.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FHLC and AGNG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FHLC | AGNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.76% | -30.58% | +1.82% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.38% | -11.45% | +1.07% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.87% | -14.48% | -2.39% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.73% | -25.66% | +7.93% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -28.76% | -30.58% | +1.82% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.08% | -9.10% | +6.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.19% | -5.97% | +0.78% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.19% | 4.68% | -0.49% |
Volatility
FHLC vs. AGNG - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) has a higher volatility of 5.04% compared to Global X Aging Population ETF (AGNG) at 4.39%. This indicates that FHLC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AGNG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FHLC | AGNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.04% | 4.39% | +0.65% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.54% | 10.31% | +0.23% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.73% | 13.70% | +1.03% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.03% | 15.23% | -0.20% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.82% | 17.14% | -0.32% |
FHLC vs. AGNG - Expense Ratio Comparison
FHLC has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than AGNG's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
FHLC vs. AGNG - Dividend Comparison
FHLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.38%, more than AGNG's 0.90% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AGNG Global X Aging Population ETF | 0.90% | 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 | 1.38% | 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
FHLC and AGNG have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FHLC has higher volatility (5.04%) compared to AGNG (4.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FHLC dropped -28.76% vs AGNG's -30.58%.
On 10-year performance, FHLC leads with 10.02% vs 9.37% for AGNG. On fees, FHLC is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, AGNG has been the lower-risk option at 4.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, FHLC has performed better with a 10.02% return vs 9.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FHLC is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for AGNG.
FHLC has the higher dividend yield at 1.38%, compared with 0.90% for AGNG.
FHLC tracks MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index, while AGNG tracks Indxx Aging Population Thematic Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for FHLC and 0.50% for AGNG.
FHLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.32 vs 0.92), 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.
Find the right allocation for FHLC and AGNG
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