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

Performance

FHLC vs. XHS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) and SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF (XHS). 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 lower than XHS's 6.32% return. Over the past 10 years, FHLC has outperformed XHS with an annualized return of 9.14%, while XHS has yielded a comparatively lower 7.46% 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%

XHS

1D
0.28%
1M
2.77%
YTD
6.32%
6M
5.39%
1Y
16.58%
3Y*
8.47%
5Y*
0.44%
10Y*
7.46%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FHLC vs. XHS - 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%
XHS
SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF
6.32%18.83%1.76%5.15%-19.87%9.76%33.66%18.81%1.96%17.65%

Correlation

The correlation between FHLC and XHS is 0.55, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.55

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

0.64

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

0.71

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

0.72

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

0.73

The correlation between FHLC and XHS shifts across timeframes, from 0.55 (1 year) to 0.73 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FHLC vs. XHS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FHLC
XHS

Healthcare

99.6%
98.0%

Financial Services

0.1%
2.0%

Technology

0.0%

-

Industrials

0.0%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Healthcare

FHLC
99.6%
XHS
98.0%

Financial Services

FHLC
0.1%
XHS
2.0%

Technology

FHLC
0.0%
XHS

-

Industrials

FHLC
0.0%
XHS

-

Basic Materials

FHLC

-

XHS

-

Communication Services

FHLC

-

XHS

-

Consumer Cyclical

FHLC

-

XHS

-

Consumer Defensive

FHLC

-

XHS

-

Energy

FHLC

-

XHS

-

Real Estate

FHLC

-

XHS

-

Utilities

FHLC

-

XHS

-

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. XHS — 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

XHS
XHS Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
XHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2626
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
XHS Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
XHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
XHS Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
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. XHS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) and SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF (XHS). 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.


FHLCXHSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.19

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.18

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.40

1.39

+0.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.52

3.83

-0.32

FHLC vs. XHS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FHLC Sharpe Ratio is 1.01, which is comparable to the XHS Sharpe Ratio of 0.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FHLC and XHS, 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


FHLCXHSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.01

0.95

+0.06

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.30

0.02

+0.28

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.55

0.33

+0.21

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.61

0.57

+0.04

Drawdowns

FHLC vs. XHS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FHLC drawdown since its inception was -28.76%, smaller than the maximum XHS drawdown of -39.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FHLC and XHS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FHLCXHSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.76%

-39.32%

+10.56%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.38%

-11.99%

+1.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.87%

-17.81%

+0.94%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.73%

-32.62%

+14.89%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.76%

-39.32%

+10.56%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.96%

-1.78%

-5.18%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.19%

-10.20%

+5.01%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.11%

4.33%

-0.22%

Volatility

FHLC vs. XHS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) is 4.05%, while SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF (XHS) has a volatility of 4.80%. This indicates that FHLC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XHS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FHLCXHSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.05%

4.80%

-0.75%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.11%

11.86%

-1.75%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.33%

17.56%

-3.23%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.97%

21.10%

-6.13%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.81%

22.40%

-5.59%

FHLC vs. XHS - Expense Ratio Comparison

FHLC has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than XHS's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

FHLC vs. XHS - Dividend Comparison

FHLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.43%, more than XHS's 0.25% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
XHS
SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF
0.25%0.27%0.38%0.23%0.19%0.20%0.23%2.37%0.34%0.22%0.28%0.93%

Frequently Asked Questions


FHLC and XHS 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.

XHS has higher volatility (4.80%) compared to FHLC (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FHLC dropped -28.76% vs XHS's -39.32%.

On 10-year performance, FHLC leads with 9.14% vs 7.46% for XHS. On fees, FHLC is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, FHLC has been the lower-risk option at 4.05%. 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 7.46%. 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 0.35% for XHS.

FHLC has the higher dividend yield at 1.43%, compared with 0.25% for XHS.

FHLC tracks MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index, while XHS tracks S&P Health Care Services Select Industry Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for FHLC and 0.35% for XHS.

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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FHLC and XHS

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