IBRN vs. BMED

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

IBRN (iShares Neuroscience and Healthcare ETF) and BMED (Future Health ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. IBRN is passively managed, while BMED is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, IBRN returned 14.57%/yr vs 8.12%/yr for BMED. Their 0.78 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. IBRN charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for BMED.

Performance

IBRN vs. BMED - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Neuroscience and Healthcare ETF (IBRN) and Future Health ETF (BMED). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBRN achieves a 13.26% return, which is significantly higher than BMED's 2.50% return.

IBRN

• 1D: -3.24%
• 1M: -6.28%
• 6M: 12.31%
• YTD: 13.26%
• 1Y: 59.23%
• 3Y*: 14.57%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.28%

BMED

• 1D: -0.84%
• 1M: -1.74%
• 6M: 0.00%
• YTD: 2.50%
• 1Y: 25.46%
• 3Y*: 8.12%
• 5Y*: 0.67%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 3.41%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BMED Future Health ETF	$35.62K	$65.92K	$64.60K
IBRN iShares Neuroscience and Healthcare ETF	$83.61K	$123.63K	$97.37K

IBRN vs. BMED - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
IBRN iShares Neuroscience and Healthcare ETF	13.26%	28.49%	-2.78%	0.92%	2.87%
BMED Future Health ETF	2.50%	21.79%	1.55%	5.70%	-0.39%

Correlation

The correlation between IBRN and BMED is 0.71, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.71
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 26, 2022	0.78

The correlation between IBRN and BMED has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

IBRN vs. BMED - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IBRN	BMED
Healthcare	100.0%	100.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	1.5%
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

IBRN vs. BMED — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IBRN

IBRN Risk / Return Rank: 91
IBRN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
IBRN Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
IBRN Omega Ratio Rank: 84
IBRN Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
IBRN Martin Ratio Rank: 93

BMED

BMED Risk / Return Rank: 60
BMED Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
BMED Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
BMED Omega Ratio Rank: 66
BMED Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
BMED Martin Ratio Rank: 39

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IBRN vs. BMED - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Neuroscience and Healthcare ETF (IBRN) and Future Health ETF (BMED). 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.

	IBRN	BMED	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.29	1.64	+0.66
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.10	2.43	+0.67
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.28	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.42	1.74	+4.68
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.74	4.01	+12.73

IBRN vs. BMED - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBRN Sharpe Ratio is 2.29, which is higher than the BMED Sharpe Ratio of 1.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBRN and BMED, 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

IBRN vs. BMED - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBRN drawdown since its inception was -35.38%, roughly equal to the maximum BMED drawdown of -36.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBRN and BMED.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBRN	BMED	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.38%	-36.44%	+1.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.15%	-14.85%	+5.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.38%	-20.12%	-15.26%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-33.90%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.15%	-3.96%	-5.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.59%	-18.75%	+9.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.50%	6.43%	-2.93%

Volatility

IBRN vs. BMED - Volatility Comparison

iShares Neuroscience and Healthcare ETF (IBRN) has a higher volatility of 7.68% compared to Future Health ETF (BMED) at 5.33%. This indicates that IBRN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BMED based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IBRN	BMED	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.68%	5.33%	+2.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.64%	12.13%	+7.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.61%	15.98%	+9.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.34%	17.55%	+7.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.34%	17.76%	+7.58%

IBRN vs. BMED - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBRN has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is lower than BMED's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBRN vs. BMED - Dividend Comparison

IBRN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%, more than BMED's 0.26% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BMED Future Health ETF	0.26%	0.00%	0.00%	0.03%
IBRN iShares Neuroscience and Healthcare ETF	0.87%	0.99%	0.40%	0.06%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBRN and BMED in my portfolio?

IBRN and BMED have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IBRN or BMED?

IBRN has higher volatility (7.68%) compared to BMED (5.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBRN dropped -35.38% vs BMED's -36.44%.

Which ETF is better, IBRN or BMED?

On 3-year performance, IBRN leads with 14.57% vs 8.12% for BMED. On fees, IBRN is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, BMED has been the lower-risk option at 5.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IBRN or BMED?

Over the 3-year period, IBRN has performed better with a 14.57% return vs 8.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBRN or BMED?

IBRN is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for BMED.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBRN or BMED?

IBRN has the higher dividend yield at 0.87%, compared with 0.26% for BMED.

What is the main difference between IBRN and BMED?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and BlackRock. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for IBRN and 0.85% for BMED.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBRN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 1.64), 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.