PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FHLC vs. FHCCX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FHLC vs. FHCCX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) and Fidelity Advisor Health Care Fund Class C (FHCCX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FHLC achieves a -3.90% return, which is significantly higher than FHCCX's -5.48% return. Over the past 10 years, FHLC has outperformed FHCCX with an annualized return of 9.14%, while FHCCX has yielded a comparatively lower 5.39% annualized return.


FHLC

1D
0.82%
1M
1.50%
YTD
-3.90%
6M
-4.11%
1Y
14.43%
3Y*
6.14%
5Y*
4.50%
10Y*
9.14%

FHCCX

1D
-1.83%
1M
-1.14%
YTD
-5.48%
6M
-22.16%
1Y
-5.48%
3Y*
-2.55%
5Y*
-2.61%
10Y*
5.39%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FHLC vs. FHCCX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FHLC
Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF
-3.90%15.42%2.48%2.58%-5.55%20.39%18.13%21.94%4.71%23.34%
FHCCX
Fidelity Advisor Health Care Fund Class C
-5.48%-5.49%3.20%3.02%-13.72%10.43%20.15%26.96%6.37%23.12%

Correlation

The correlation between FHLC and FHCCX is 0.81, 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

0.81

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.84

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.88

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.90

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2013

0.91

The correlation between FHLC and FHCCX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

FHLC vs. FHCCX - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FHLC
FHCCX

Healthcare

99.6%
100.0%

Financial Services

0.1%

-

Technology

0.0%

-

Industrials

0.0%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Healthcare

FHLC
99.6%
FHCCX
100.0%

Financial Services

FHLC
0.1%
FHCCX

-

Technology

FHLC
0.0%
FHCCX

-

Industrials

FHLC
0.0%
FHCCX

-

Basic Materials

FHLC

-

FHCCX

-

Communication Services

FHLC

-

FHCCX

-

Consumer Cyclical

FHLC

-

FHCCX

-

Consumer Defensive

FHLC

-

FHCCX

-

Energy

FHLC

-

FHCCX

-

Real Estate

FHLC

-

FHCCX

-

Utilities

FHLC

-

FHCCX

-

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. FHCCX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FHLC
FHLC Risk / Return Rank: 2727
Overall Rank
FHLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2727
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FHLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
FHLC Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
FHLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
FHLC Martin Ratio Rank: 2626
Martin Ratio Rank

FHCCX
FHCCX Risk / Return Rank: 22
Overall Rank
FHCCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FHCCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
Sortino Ratio Rank
FHCCX Omega Ratio Rank: 22
Omega Ratio Rank
FHCCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
Calmar Ratio Rank
FHCCX Martin Ratio Rank: 22
Martin Ratio Rank
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. FHCCX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) and Fidelity Advisor Health Care Fund Class C (FHCCX). 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.


FHLCFHCCXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.23

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.70

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

0.98

+0.20

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.40

-0.19

+1.59

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.52

-0.36

+3.88

FHLC vs. FHCCX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FHLC Sharpe Ratio is 1.01, which is higher than the FHCCX Sharpe Ratio of -0.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FHLC and FHCCX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FHLCFHCCXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.01

-0.22

+1.23

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.30

-0.13

+0.44

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.55

0.28

+0.27

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.61

0.46

+0.15

Drawdowns

FHLC vs. FHCCX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FHLC drawdown since its inception was -28.76%, smaller than the maximum FHCCX drawdown of -45.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FHLC and FHCCX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FHLCFHCCXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.76%

-45.28%

+16.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.38%

-27.25%

+16.87%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.87%

-27.25%

+10.38%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.73%

-29.67%

+11.94%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.76%

-29.67%

+0.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.96%

-23.77%

+16.81%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.19%

-10.19%

+5.00%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.11%

14.26%

-10.15%

Volatility

FHLC vs. FHCCX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) is 4.05%, while Fidelity Advisor Health Care Fund Class C (FHCCX) has a volatility of 5.07%. This indicates that FHLC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FHCCX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FHLCFHCCXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.05%

5.07%

-1.02%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.11%

22.60%

-12.49%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.33%

23.64%

-9.31%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.97%

19.54%

-4.57%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.81%

19.57%

-2.76%

FHLC vs. FHCCX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FHLC has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than FHCCX's 1.72% expense ratio.


Dividends

FHLC vs. FHCCX - Dividend Comparison

FHLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.43%, while FHCCX has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FHCCX
Fidelity Advisor Health Care Fund Class C
0.00%0.00%17.59%0.00%0.00%8.32%6.85%0.41%6.43%0.00%0.00%7.84%
FHLC
Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF
1.43%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 FHCCX have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FHCCX has higher volatility (5.07%) compared to FHLC (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FHLC dropped -28.76% vs FHCCX's -45.28%.

FHLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.01 vs -0.22), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FHLC and FHCCX

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