FMED vs. XLV

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

FMED (Fidelity Disruptive Medicine ETF) and XLV (State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. FMED is actively managed, while XLV is passively managed. Over the past year, FMED returned 4.49% vs 12.27% for XLV. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FMED charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for XLV.

Performance

FMED vs. XLV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Disruptive Medicine ETF (FMED) and State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FMED achieves a -9.30% return, which is significantly lower than XLV's -5.04% return.

FMED

• 1D: -1.51%
• 1M: -0.65%
• YTD: -9.30%
• 6M: -12.64%
• 1Y: 4.49%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

XLV

• 1D: -0.97%
• 1M: 0.85%
• YTD: -5.04%
• 6M: -4.36%
• 1Y: 12.27%
• 3Y*: 5.70%
• 5Y*: 5.45%
• 10Y*: 9.12%

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

FMED vs. XLV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FMED Fidelity Disruptive Medicine ETF	-9.30%	9.69%	2.29%	-4.20%
XLV State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF	-5.04%	14.50%	2.47%	5.52%

Correlation

The correlation between FMED and XLV is 0.63, 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	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2023	0.67

The correlation between FMED and XLV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.

FMED vs. XLV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FMED	XLV
Healthcare	98.0%	100.0%
Technology	1.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FMED vs. XLV — Risk / Return Rank

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

FMED

FMED Risk / Return Rank: 12
FMED Sharpe Ratio Rank: 12
FMED Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
FMED Omega Ratio Rank: 12
FMED Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
FMED Martin Ratio Rank: 11

XLV

XLV Risk / Return Rank: 24
XLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
XLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
XLV Omega Ratio Rank: 23
XLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
XLV Martin Ratio Rank: 22

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.

FMED vs. XLV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Disruptive Medicine ETF (FMED) and State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLV). 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.

	FMED	XLV	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.24	0.84	-0.60
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.49	1.36	-0.86
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.05	1.15	-0.10
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.27	1.18	-0.91
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	0.62	2.87	-2.25
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FMED vs. XLV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FMED Sharpe Ratio is 0.24, which is lower than the XLV Sharpe Ratio of 0.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FMED and XLV, 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

	FMED	XLV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.24	0.84	-0.60
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.37	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.55	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.05	0.46	-0.50

Drawdowns

FMED vs. XLV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FMED drawdown since its inception was -21.84%, smaller than the maximum XLV drawdown of -39.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMED and XLV.

Drawdown Indicators

	FMED	XLV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.84%	-39.17%	+17.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.33%	-10.47%	-7.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.11%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-17.11%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-28.40%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-14.91%	-8.24%	-6.67%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.03%	-7.12%	+0.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.90%	4.30%	+3.60%

Volatility

FMED vs. XLV - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Disruptive Medicine ETF (FMED) has a higher volatility of 5.65% compared to State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLV) at 4.05%. This indicates that FMED's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FMED	XLV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.65%	4.05%	+1.60%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.21%	10.32%	+3.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.59%	14.65%	+3.94%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.39%	14.69%	+3.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.39%	16.55%	+1.84%

FMED vs. XLV - Expense Ratio Comparison

FMED has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than XLV's 0.08% expense ratio.

Dividends

FMED vs. XLV - Dividend Comparison

FMED has not paid dividends to shareholders, while XLV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.71%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FMED Fidelity Disruptive Medicine ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.46%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XLV State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF	1.71%	1.60%	1.67%	1.59%	1.47%	1.33%	1.49%	2.17%	1.57%	1.47%	1.60%	1.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FMED and XLV in my portfolio?

FMED and XLV have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FMED or XLV?

FMED has higher volatility (5.65%) compared to XLV (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FMED dropped -21.84% vs XLV's -39.17%.

Which ETF is better, FMED or XLV?

On 1-year performance, XLV leads with 12.27% vs 4.49% for FMED. On fees, XLV is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, XLV has been the lower-risk option at 4.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FMED or XLV?

Over the 1-year period, XLV has performed better with a 12.27% return vs 4.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FMED or XLV?

XLV is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FMED.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FMED or XLV?

XLV has the higher dividend yield at 1.71%, compared with 0.00% for FMED.

What is the main difference between FMED and XLV?

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FMED and 0.08% for XLV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XLV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.84 vs 0.24), 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.