GNOM vs. XHS

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

GNOM (Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF) and XHS (SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - GNOM tracks the Solactive Genomics Index while XHS tracks the S&P Health Care Services Select Industry Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, GNOM returned -9.31%/yr vs 4.60%/yr for XHS. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GNOM charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for XHS.

Performance

GNOM vs. XHS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF (GNOM) and SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF (XHS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GNOM achieves a 20.95% return, which is significantly lower than XHS's 27.15% return.

GNOM

• 1D: -0.33%
• 1M: 7.17%
• 6M: 14.99%
• YTD: 20.95%
• 1Y: 59.62%
• 3Y*: 4.19%
• 5Y*: -9.31%
• 10Y*: —

XHS

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: 12.38%
• 6M: 23.43%
• YTD: 27.15%
• 1Y: 46.39%
• 3Y*: 13.11%
• 5Y*: 4.60%
• 10Y*: 9.20%

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

GNOM vs. XHS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
GNOM Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF	20.95%	18.65%	-15.99%	-8.63%	-36.27%	-15.93%	51.52%	2.03%
XHS SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF	27.15%	18.83%	1.76%	5.15%	-19.87%	9.76%	33.66%	13.64%

Correlation

The correlation between GNOM and XHS is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.57
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 10, 2019	0.63

The correlation between GNOM and XHS shifts across timeframes, from 0.49 (1 year) to 0.66 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

GNOM vs. XHS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GNOM	XHS
Healthcare	99.7%	95.7%
Technology	0.3%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	3.7%
Industrials	-	0.5%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

GNOM vs. XHS — Risk / Return Rank

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

GNOM

GNOM Risk / Return Rank: 78
GNOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
GNOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
GNOM Omega Ratio Rank: 74
GNOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
GNOM Martin Ratio Rank: 68

XHS

XHS Risk / Return Rank: 89
XHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
XHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
XHS Omega Ratio Rank: 90
XHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
XHS Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

GNOM vs. XHS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF (GNOM) 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.

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.

	GNOM	XHS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.19	2.60	-0.41
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.01	3.47	-0.46
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.45	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.30	3.89	-0.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.43	13.41	-3.98

GNOM vs. XHS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GNOM Sharpe Ratio is 2.19, which is comparable to the XHS Sharpe Ratio of 2.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GNOM 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.

Drawdowns

GNOM vs. XHS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GNOM drawdown since its inception was -75.00%, which is greater than XHS's maximum drawdown of -39.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GNOM and XHS.

Drawdown Indicators

	GNOM	XHS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-75.00%	-39.32%	-35.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.17%	-11.99%	-6.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-44.24%	-17.81%	-26.43%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-72.14%	-31.34%	-40.80%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.32%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-50.02%	-1.42%	-48.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-40.70%	-10.12%	-30.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.34%	3.48%	+2.86%

Volatility

GNOM vs. XHS - Volatility Comparison

Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF (GNOM) has a higher volatility of 7.71% compared to SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF (XHS) at 5.40%. This indicates that GNOM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XHS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GNOM	XHS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.71%	5.40%	+2.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.72%	12.80%	+7.92%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.31%	17.91%	+9.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.70%	21.21%	+12.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.11%	22.40%	+11.71%

GNOM vs. XHS - Expense Ratio Comparison

GNOM has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than XHS's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

GNOM vs. XHS - Dividend Comparison

GNOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.18%, more than XHS's 0.20% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GNOM Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF	1.18%	1.37%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.03%	0.14%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XHS SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF	0.20%	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

Can I hold both GNOM and XHS in my portfolio?

GNOM and XHS have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GNOM or XHS?

GNOM has higher volatility (7.71%) compared to XHS (5.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GNOM dropped -75.00% vs XHS's -39.32%.

Which ETF is better, GNOM or XHS?

On 5-year performance, XHS leads with 4.60% vs -9.31% for GNOM. On fees, XHS is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, XHS has been the lower-risk option at 5.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GNOM or XHS?

Over the 5-year period, XHS has performed better with a 4.60% return vs -9.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GNOM or XHS?

XHS is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for GNOM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GNOM or XHS?

GNOM has the higher dividend yield at 1.18%, compared with 0.20% for XHS.

What is the main difference between GNOM and XHS?

GNOM tracks Solactive Genomics Index, while XHS tracks S&P Health Care Services Select Industry Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for GNOM and 0.35% for XHS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.60 vs 2.19), 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.