IBB vs. FHLC
IBB (iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF) and FHLC (Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - IBB tracks the NASDAQ Biotechnology Index while FHLC tracks the MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IBB returned 6.23%/yr vs 9.14%/yr for FHLC. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IBB charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for FHLC.
Performance
IBB vs. FHLC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IBB achieves a -0.68% return, which is significantly higher than FHLC's -3.90% return. Over the past 10 years, IBB has underperformed FHLC with an annualized return of 6.23%, while FHLC has yielded a comparatively higher 9.14% annualized return.
IBB
- 1D
- 1.97%
- 1M
- -1.56%
- YTD
- -0.68%
- 6M
- -2.57%
- 1Y
- 34.50%
- 3Y*
- 9.40%
- 5Y*
- 2.10%
- 10Y*
- 6.23%
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%
IBB vs. FHLC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBB iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF | -0.68% | 27.98% | -2.41% | 3.76% | -13.69% | 0.95% | 26.01% | 25.42% | -9.53% | 21.08% |
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% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBB and FHLC is 0.79, 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 | 0.79 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2013 | 0.82 |
The correlation between IBB and FHLC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.
IBB vs. FHLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IBB
FHLC
Healthcare
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
-
Healthcare
IBB
FHLC
Basic Materials
IBB
-
FHLC
-
Communication Services
IBB
-
FHLC
-
Consumer Cyclical
IBB
-
FHLC
-
Consumer Defensive
IBB
-
FHLC
-
Energy
IBB
-
FHLC
-
Financial Services
IBB
-
FHLC
Industrials
IBB
-
FHLC
Real Estate
IBB
-
FHLC
-
Technology
IBB
-
FHLC
Utilities
IBB
-
FHLC
-
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
IBB vs. FHLC — Risk / Return Rank
IBB
FHLC
IBB vs. FHLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF (IBB) 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.
| IBB | FHLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.74 | 1.01 | +0.73 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.50 | 1.58 | +0.92 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.18 | +0.12 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.60 | 1.40 | +2.20 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.43 | 3.52 | +7.91 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IBB | FHLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.74 | 1.01 | +0.73 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.10 | 0.30 | -0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.27 | 0.55 | -0.28 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.26 | 0.61 | -0.35 |
Drawdowns
IBB vs. FHLC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBB drawdown since its inception was -62.85%, which is greater than FHLC's maximum drawdown of -28.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBB and FHLC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBB | FHLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -62.85% | -28.76% | -34.09% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.63% | -10.38% | +0.75% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.85% | -16.87% | -7.98% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -39.82% | -17.73% | -22.09% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.82% | -28.76% | -11.06% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.64% | -6.96% | +1.32% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -21.18% | -5.19% | -15.99% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.03% | 4.11% | -1.08% |
Volatility
IBB vs. FHLC - Volatility Comparison
iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF (IBB) has a higher volatility of 6.86% compared to Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) at 4.05%. This indicates that IBB'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBB | FHLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.86% | 4.05% | +2.81% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.38% | 10.11% | +5.27% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.89% | 14.33% | +5.56% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.99% | 14.97% | +7.02% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.22% | 16.81% | +6.41% |
IBB vs. FHLC - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBB has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is higher than FHLC's 0.08% expense ratio.
Dividends
IBB vs. FHLC - Dividend Comparison
IBB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.23%, 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% |
IBB iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology ETF | 0.23% | 0.23% | 0.29% | 0.26% | 0.31% | 0.21% | 0.21% | 0.33% | 0.20% | 0.30% | 0.19% | 0.03% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IBB and FHLC have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IBB has higher volatility (6.86%) compared to FHLC (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBB dropped -62.85% vs FHLC's -28.76%.
On 10-year performance, FHLC leads with 9.14% vs 6.23% for IBB. 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 6.23%. 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 0.47% for IBB.
FHLC has the higher dividend yield at 1.43%, compared with 0.23% for IBB.
IBB tracks NASDAQ Biotechnology Index, while FHLC tracks MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for IBB and 0.08% for FHLC.
IBB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.74 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.
Find the right allocation for IBB and FHLC
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