HEAL vs. FHLC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

HEAL (Global X HealthTech ETF) and FHLC (Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - HEAL tracks the Global X HealthTech Index while FHLC tracks the MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, HEAL returned -14.71%/yr vs 4.50%/yr for FHLC. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HEAL charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for FHLC.

Performance

HEAL vs. FHLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X HealthTech ETF (HEAL) and Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HEAL achieves a -15.57% return, which is significantly lower than FHLC's -3.90% return.

HEAL

• 1D: -1.16%
• 1M: -2.59%
• YTD: -15.57%
• 6M: -20.78%
• 1Y: -22.08%
• 3Y*: -10.46%
• 5Y*: -14.71%
• 10Y*: —

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%

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

HEAL vs. FHLC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
HEAL Global X HealthTech ETF	-15.57%	-0.62%	-2.87%	-12.61%	-29.99%	-14.21%	23.87%
FHLC Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF	-3.90%	15.42%	2.48%	2.58%	-5.55%	20.39%	10.27%

Correlation

The correlation between HEAL and FHLC is 0.54, 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	0.54
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.53
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2020	0.62

The correlation between HEAL and FHLC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

HEAL vs. FHLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HEAL	FHLC
Healthcare	96.0%	99.6%
Technology	3.2%	0.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	0.1%
Industrials	-	0.0%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

HEAL vs. FHLC — Risk / Return Rank

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

HEAL

HEAL Risk / Return Rank: 2
HEAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
HEAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
HEAL Omega Ratio Rank: 2
HEAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
HEAL Martin Ratio Rank: 1

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

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.

HEAL vs. FHLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X HealthTech ETF (HEAL) and Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC). 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.

	HEAL	FHLC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.01	1.01	-2.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.40	1.58	-2.98
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.85	1.18	-0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.72	1.40	-2.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.46	3.52	-4.98
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HEAL vs. FHLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HEAL Sharpe Ratio is -1.01, which is lower than the FHLC Sharpe Ratio of 1.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HEAL and FHLC, 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

	HEAL	FHLC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-1.01	1.01	-2.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.56	0.30	-0.86
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.55	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.39	0.61	-1.00

Drawdowns

HEAL vs. FHLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HEAL drawdown since its inception was -65.76%, which is greater than FHLC's maximum drawdown of -28.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HEAL and FHLC.

Drawdown Indicators

	HEAL	FHLC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-65.76%	-28.76%	-37.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.71%	-10.38%	-20.33%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.78%	-16.87%	-18.91%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-60.36%	-17.73%	-42.63%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-28.76%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-63.55%	-6.96%	-56.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-43.02%	-5.19%	-37.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.13%	4.11%	+11.02%

Volatility

HEAL vs. FHLC - Volatility Comparison

Global X HealthTech ETF (HEAL) has a higher volatility of 5.21% compared to Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) at 4.05%. This indicates that HEAL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FHLC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HEAL	FHLC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.21%	4.05%	+1.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.69%	10.11%	+5.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.89%	14.33%	+7.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.37%	14.97%	+11.40%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.18%	16.81%	+9.37%

HEAL vs. FHLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

HEAL has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FHLC's 0.08% expense ratio.

Dividends

HEAL vs. FHLC - Dividend Comparison

HEAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.39%, less than FHLC's 1.43% 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%
HEAL Global X HealthTech ETF	0.39%	0.33%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.03%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HEAL and FHLC in my portfolio?

HEAL and FHLC have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HEAL or FHLC?

HEAL has higher volatility (5.21%) compared to FHLC (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HEAL dropped -65.76% vs FHLC's -28.76%.

Which ETF is better, HEAL or FHLC?

On 5-year performance, FHLC leads with 4.50% vs -14.71% for HEAL. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, HEAL or FHLC?

Over the 5-year period, FHLC has performed better with a 4.50% return vs -14.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HEAL or FHLC?

FHLC is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for HEAL.

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

FHLC has the higher dividend yield at 1.43%, compared with 0.39% for HEAL.

What is the main difference between HEAL and FHLC?

HEAL tracks Global X HealthTech Index, while FHLC tracks MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for HEAL and 0.08% for FHLC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

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