FHLC vs. IHF

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

FHLC (Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF) and IHF (iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - FHLC tracks the MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index while IHF tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Select Healthcare Providers Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FHLC returned 9.78%/yr vs 9.49%/yr for IHF. Their 0.76 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. FHLC charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for IHF.

Performance

FHLC vs. IHF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) and iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF (IHF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FHLC achieves a 6.75% return, which is significantly lower than IHF's 18.08% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with FHLC having a 9.78% annualized return and IHF not far behind at 9.49%.

FHLC

• 1D: -0.87%
• 1M: -1.15%
• 6M: 6.97%
• YTD: 6.75%
• 1Y: 27.92%
• 3Y*: 9.06%
• 5Y*: 5.04%
• 10Y*: 9.78%
• ALL TIME*: 10.72%

IHF

• 1D: -0.65%
• 1M: -1.95%
• 6M: 24.31%
• YTD: 18.08%
• 1Y: 39.67%
• 3Y*: 3.50%
• 5Y*: 1.81%
• 10Y*: 9.49%
• ALL TIME*: 9.83%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FHLC Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF	$13.10M	$18.62M	$15.92M
IHF iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF	$33.12M	$27.16M	$26.59M

FHLC vs. IHF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FHLC Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF	6.75%	15.42%	2.48%	2.58%	-5.55%	20.39%	18.13%	21.94%	4.71%	23.34%
IHF iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF	18.08%	0.92%	-7.90%	-1.11%	-7.11%	24.46%	17.67%	22.34%	9.56%	25.45%

Correlation

The correlation between FHLC and IHF is 0.55, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.55
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.65
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.74
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.75
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2013	0.76

Over the past year, the correlation between FHLC and IHF has dropped to 0.55 - well below their long-term average of 0.76, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

FHLC vs. IHF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FHLC	IHF
Healthcare	98.9%	95.2%
Technology	0.4%	4.4%
Financial Services	0.0%	0.3%
Industrials	0.0%	0.1%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FHLC vs. IHF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FHLC

FHLC Risk / Return Rank: 77
FHLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
FHLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
FHLC Omega Ratio Rank: 78
FHLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
FHLC Martin Ratio Rank: 58

IHF

IHF Risk / Return Rank: 66
IHF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
IHF Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
IHF Omega Ratio Rank: 81
IHF Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
IHF Martin Ratio Rank: 46

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FHLC vs. IHF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) and iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF (IHF). 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	IHF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.89	1.81	+0.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.91	2.34	+0.57
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.34	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.75	1.88	+0.88
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.86	5.15	+1.71

FHLC vs. IHF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FHLC Sharpe Ratio is 1.89, which is comparable to the IHF Sharpe Ratio of 1.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FHLC and IHF, 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

FHLC vs. IHF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FHLC drawdown since its inception was -28.76%, smaller than the maximum IHF drawdown of -58.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FHLC and IHF.

Drawdown Indicators

	FHLC	IHF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.76%	-58.42%	+29.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.38%	-19.72%	+9.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.87%	-29.85%	+12.98%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.73%	-29.85%	+12.12%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-28.76%	-35.23%	+6.47%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.78%	-2.98%	+0.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.16%	-10.59%	+5.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.16%	7.18%	-3.02%

Volatility

FHLC vs. IHF - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) has a higher volatility of 5.57% compared to iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF (IHF) at 4.88%. This indicates that FHLC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IHF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FHLC	IHF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.57%	4.88%	+0.69%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.69%	12.93%	-1.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.36%	20.62%	-5.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.25%	19.29%	-4.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.89%	21.04%	-4.15%

FHLC vs. IHF - Expense Ratio Comparison

FHLC has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than IHF's 0.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

FHLC vs. IHF - Dividend Comparison

FHLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.30%, more than IHF's 0.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FHLC Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF	1.30%	1.40%	1.51%	1.40%	1.30%	1.16%	1.45%	1.18%	1.38%	1.38%	1.40%	2.07%
IHF iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF	0.93%	1.05%	0.86%	0.79%	0.74%	0.56%	0.53%	0.58%	4.01%	0.19%	0.25%	0.20%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FHLC and IHF in my portfolio?

FHLC and IHF have a correlation of 0.55, 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 IHF?

FHLC has higher volatility (5.57%) compared to IHF (4.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FHLC dropped -28.76% vs IHF's -58.42%.

Which ETF is better, FHLC or IHF?

On 10-year performance, FHLC leads with 9.78% vs 9.49% for IHF. On fees, FHLC is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, IHF has been the lower-risk option at 4.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FHLC or IHF?

Over the 10-year period, FHLC has performed better with a 9.78% return vs 9.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FHLC or IHF?

FHLC is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for IHF.

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

FHLC has the higher dividend yield at 1.30%, compared with 0.93% for IHF.

What is the main difference between FHLC and IHF?

FHLC tracks MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index, while IHF tracks Dow Jones U.S. Select Healthcare Providers Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for FHLC and 0.38% for IHF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FHLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.89 vs 1.81), 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.