FHLC vs. RSPH

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FHLC (Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF) and RSPH (Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - FHLC tracks the MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index while RSPH tracks the S&P 500 Equal Weighted / Health Care -SEC. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FHLC returned 9.14%/yr vs 7.94%/yr for RSPH. Their correlation of 0.95 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FHLC charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for RSPH.

Performance

FHLC vs. RSPH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF (RSPH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FHLC achieves a -3.90% return, which is significantly lower than RSPH's -2.71% return. Over the past 10 years, FHLC has outperformed RSPH with an annualized return of 9.14%, while RSPH has yielded a comparatively lower 7.94% 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%

RSPH

• 1D: 0.81%
• 1M: 2.49%
• YTD: -2.71%
• 6M: -2.70%
• 1Y: 8.70%
• 3Y*: 3.21%
• 5Y*: 2.54%
• 10Y*: 7.94%

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

FHLC vs. RSPH - 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%
RSPH Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF	-2.71%	9.52%	-0.94%	3.95%	-9.40%	23.19%	18.83%	25.48%	-0.66%	23.70%

Correlation

The correlation between FHLC and RSPH is 0.85, 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	0.85
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.89
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.92
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2013	0.95

The correlation between FHLC and RSPH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

FHLC vs. RSPH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FHLC	RSPH
Healthcare	99.6%	98.5%
Financial Services	0.1%	0.1%
Technology	0.0%	-
Industrials	0.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FHLC vs. RSPH — Risk / Return Rank

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

FHLC

FHLC Risk / Return Rank: 27
FHLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
FHLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
FHLC Omega Ratio Rank: 26
FHLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
FHLC Martin Ratio Rank: 26

RSPH

RSPH Risk / Return Rank: 18
RSPH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
RSPH Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
RSPH Omega Ratio Rank: 17
RSPH Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
RSPH Martin Ratio Rank: 19

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. RSPH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF (RSPH). 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	RSPH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.01	0.57	+0.45
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.58	0.91	+0.67
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.11	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.40	0.80	+0.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.52	2.01	+1.50
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. RSPH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FHLC Sharpe Ratio is 1.01, which is higher than the RSPH Sharpe Ratio of 0.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FHLC and RSPH, 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	RSPH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.01	0.57	+0.45
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.30	0.16	+0.15
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.55	0.45	+0.10
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.61	0.58	+0.03

Drawdowns

FHLC vs. RSPH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FHLC drawdown since its inception was -28.76%, smaller than the maximum RSPH drawdown of -40.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FHLC and RSPH.

Drawdown Indicators

	FHLC	RSPH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.76%	-40.49%	+11.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.38%	-10.87%	+0.49%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.87%	-17.13%	+0.26%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.73%	-21.95%	+4.22%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-28.76%	-30.44%	+1.68%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.96%	-6.83%	-0.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.19%	-6.14%	+0.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.11%	4.33%	-0.22%

Volatility

FHLC vs. RSPH - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF (RSPH) have volatilities of 4.05% and 3.87%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	FHLC	RSPH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.05%	3.87%	+0.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.11%	10.36%	-0.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.33%	15.46%	-1.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.97%	16.26%	-1.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.81%	17.72%	-0.91%

FHLC vs. RSPH - Expense Ratio Comparison

FHLC has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than RSPH's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

FHLC vs. RSPH - Dividend Comparison

FHLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.43%, more than RSPH's 0.73% 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%
RSPH Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Health Care ETF	0.73%	0.70%	0.71%	0.66%	0.64%	0.50%	0.51%	0.54%	0.53%	0.47%	0.48%	0.49%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FHLC and RSPH in my portfolio?

FHLC and RSPH have a correlation of 0.85, 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 RSPH?

FHLC has higher volatility (4.05%) compared to RSPH (3.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FHLC dropped -28.76% vs RSPH's -40.49%.

Which ETF is better, FHLC or RSPH?

On 10-year performance, FHLC leads with 9.14% vs 7.94% for RSPH. On fees, FHLC is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, RSPH has been the lower-risk option at 3.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FHLC or RSPH?

Over the 10-year period, FHLC has performed better with a 9.14% return vs 7.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FHLC or RSPH?

FHLC is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for RSPH.

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

FHLC has the higher dividend yield at 1.43%, compared with 0.73% for RSPH.

What is the main difference between FHLC and RSPH?

FHLC tracks MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index, while RSPH tracks S&P 500 Equal Weighted / Health Care -SEC. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for FHLC and 0.40% for RSPH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FHLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.01 vs 0.57), 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.