FHLC vs. MOO
FHLC (Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF) and MOO (VanEck Agribusiness ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FHLC is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index, while MOO is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the MVIS Global Agribusiness Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FHLC returned 9.14%/yr vs 7.00%/yr for MOO. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FHLC charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for MOO.
Performance
FHLC vs. MOO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FHLC achieves a -3.90% return, which is significantly lower than MOO's 10.10% return. Over the past 10 years, FHLC has outperformed MOO with an annualized return of 9.14%, while MOO has yielded a comparatively lower 7.00% 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%
MOO
- 1D
- 0.48%
- 1M
- -4.21%
- YTD
- 10.10%
- 6M
- 11.54%
- 1Y
- 13.06%
- 3Y*
- 3.07%
- 5Y*
- -0.70%
- 10Y*
- 7.00%
FHLC vs. MOO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
MOO VanEck Agribusiness ETF | 10.10% | 15.61% | -12.43% | -8.57% | -8.10% | 23.99% | 14.59% | 22.29% | -6.03% | 21.75% |
Correlation
The correlation between FHLC and MOO is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.40 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.54 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2013 | 0.60 |
The correlation between FHLC and MOO shifts across timeframes, from 0.40 (1 year) to 0.60 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
FHLC vs. MOO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FHLC
MOO
Healthcare
Financial Services
-
Technology
-
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Healthcare
FHLC
MOO
Financial Services
FHLC
MOO
-
Technology
FHLC
MOO
-
Industrials
FHLC
MOO
Basic Materials
FHLC
-
MOO
Communication Services
FHLC
-
MOO
-
Consumer Cyclical
FHLC
-
MOO
-
Consumer Defensive
FHLC
-
MOO
Energy
FHLC
-
MOO
-
Real Estate
FHLC
-
MOO
-
Utilities
FHLC
-
MOO
-
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. MOO — Risk / Return Rank
FHLC
MOO
FHLC vs. MOO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) and VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO). 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 | MOO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.07 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.15 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.17 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.40 | 1.55 | -0.16 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.52 | 3.88 | -0.36 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FHLC | MOO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.01 | 0.95 | +0.07 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.30 | -0.04 | +0.34 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.55 | 0.39 | +0.16 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.61 | 0.22 | +0.38 |
Drawdowns
FHLC vs. MOO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FHLC drawdown since its inception was -28.76%, smaller than the maximum MOO drawdown of -69.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FHLC and MOO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FHLC | MOO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.76% | -69.53% | +40.77% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.38% | -8.45% | -1.93% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.87% | -26.83% | +9.96% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.73% | -39.52% | +21.79% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -28.76% | -39.52% | +10.76% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.96% | -17.50% | +10.54% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.19% | -16.97% | +11.78% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.11% | 3.37% | +0.74% |
Volatility
FHLC vs. MOO - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) and VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO) have volatilities of 4.05% and 4.08%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FHLC | MOO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.05% | 4.08% | -0.03% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.11% | 10.57% | -0.46% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.33% | 13.88% | +0.45% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.97% | 17.12% | -2.15% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.81% | 18.19% | -1.38% |
FHLC vs. MOO - Expense Ratio Comparison
FHLC has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than MOO's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
FHLC vs. MOO - Dividend Comparison
FHLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.43%, less than MOO's 2.24% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
MOO VanEck Agribusiness ETF | 2.24% | 2.47% | 3.41% | 2.93% | 2.15% | 1.17% | 1.10% | 1.26% | 1.69% | 1.44% | 2.14% | 2.89% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FHLC and MOO have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MOO has higher volatility (4.08%) compared to FHLC (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FHLC dropped -28.76% vs MOO's -69.53%.
On 10-year performance, FHLC leads with 9.14% vs 7.00% for MOO. On fees, FHLC is cheaper at 0.08% per year. Their volatility is very similar. 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 9.14% return vs 7.00%. 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 0.55% for MOO.
MOO has the higher dividend yield at 2.24%, compared with 1.43% for FHLC.
FHLC is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while MOO is Large Cap Blend Equities. FHLC tracks MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index, while MOO tracks MVIS Global Agribusiness Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for FHLC and 0.55% for MOO.
FHLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.01 vs 0.95), 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 MOO
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