FHLC vs. EMXC

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

FHLC (Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF) and EMXC (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FHLC is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index, while EMXC is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FHLC returned 4.80%/yr vs 11.46%/yr for EMXC. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FHLC charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for EMXC.

Performance

FHLC vs. EMXC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FHLC achieves a -1.04% return, which is significantly lower than EMXC's 32.33% return.

FHLC

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 5.45%
• YTD: -1.04%
• 6M: 0.82%
• 1Y: 16.51%
• 3Y*: 7.13%
• 5Y*: 4.80%
• 10Y*: 9.56%

EMXC

• 1D: 2.43%
• 1M: -1.88%
• YTD: 32.33%
• 6M: 36.39%
• 1Y: 62.72%
• 3Y*: 25.41%
• 5Y*: 11.46%
• 10Y*: —

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

FHLC vs. EMXC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FHLC Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF	-1.04%	15.42%	2.48%	2.58%	-5.55%	20.39%	18.13%	21.94%	4.71%	4.06%
EMXC iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF	32.33%	35.14%	2.68%	18.96%	-19.56%	8.54%	12.76%	15.80%	-12.96%	7.01%

Correlation

The correlation between FHLC and EMXC is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.25
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.33
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.41
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 27, 2017	0.45

The correlation between FHLC and EMXC shifts across timeframes, from 0.25 (1 year) to 0.45 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FHLC vs. EMXC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FHLC	EMXC
Healthcare	99.6%	2.2%
Financial Services	0.1%	19.6%
Technology	0.0%	45.0%
Industrials	0.0%	8.3%
Basic Materials	-	6.8%
Communication Services	-	3.4%
Consumer Cyclical	-	4.5%
Consumer Defensive	-	2.9%
Energy	-	4.2%
Real Estate	-	1.0%
Utilities	-	2.3%

Return for Risk

FHLC vs. EMXC — Risk / Return Rank

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

FHLC

FHLC Risk / Return Rank: 34
FHLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
FHLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
FHLC Omega Ratio Rank: 33
FHLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
FHLC Martin Ratio Rank: 30

EMXC

EMXC Risk / Return Rank: 86
EMXC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
EMXC Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
EMXC Omega Ratio Rank: 88
EMXC Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
EMXC Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

FHLC vs. EMXC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC). 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.

	FHLC	EMXC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.14	2.71	-1.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.78	3.27	-1.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.50	-0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.60	4.37	-2.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.00	17.27	-13.27
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FHLC vs. EMXC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FHLC Sharpe Ratio is 1.14, which is lower than the EMXC Sharpe Ratio of 2.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FHLC and EMXC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FHLC	EMXC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.14	2.71	-1.58
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.32	0.65	-0.33
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.57	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.62	0.50	+0.12

Drawdowns

FHLC vs. EMXC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FHLC drawdown since its inception was -28.76%, smaller than the maximum EMXC drawdown of -42.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FHLC and EMXC.

Drawdown Indicators

	FHLC	EMXC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.76%	-42.81%	+14.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.38%	-14.41%	+4.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.87%	-19.12%	+2.25%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.73%	-28.91%	+11.18%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-28.76%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.18%	-7.55%	+3.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.19%	-10.19%	+5.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.14%	3.64%	+0.50%

Volatility

FHLC vs. EMXC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) is 4.86%, while iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF (EMXC) has a volatility of 12.57%. This indicates that FHLC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EMXC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FHLC	EMXC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.86%	12.57%	-7.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.49%	21.20%	-10.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.62%	23.27%	-8.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.02%	17.82%	-2.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.84%	19.99%	-3.15%

FHLC vs. EMXC - Expense Ratio Comparison

FHLC has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than EMXC's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

FHLC vs. EMXC - Dividend Comparison

FHLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.38%, less than EMXC's 2.13% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EMXC iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China ETF	2.13%	2.82%	2.69%	1.83%	2.85%	1.78%	1.45%	3.25%	2.63%	0.99%	0.00%	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

Can I hold both FHLC and EMXC in my portfolio?

FHLC and EMXC have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FHLC or EMXC?

EMXC has higher volatility (12.57%) compared to FHLC (4.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FHLC dropped -28.76% vs EMXC's -42.81%.

Which ETF is better, FHLC or EMXC?

On 5-year performance, EMXC leads with 11.46% vs 4.80% for FHLC. On fees, FHLC is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, FHLC has been the lower-risk option at 4.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FHLC or EMXC?

Over the 5-year period, EMXC has performed better with a 11.46% return vs 4.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FHLC or EMXC?

FHLC is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for EMXC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FHLC or EMXC?

EMXC has the higher dividend yield at 2.13%, compared with 1.38% for FHLC.

What is the main difference between FHLC and EMXC?

FHLC is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while EMXC is Emerging Markets Equities. FHLC tracks MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index, while EMXC tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for FHLC and 0.49% for EMXC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EMXC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.71 vs 1.14), 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.