IHF vs. CNCR
IHF (iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF) and CNCR (Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - IHF tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Select Health Care Providers Index while CNCR tracks the Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy Index. Both are passively managed. IHF charges 0.43%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for CNCR.
Performance
IHF vs. CNCR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
IHF
- 1D
- 0.90%
- 1M
- 7.60%
- 6M
- 17.04%
- YTD
- 20.41%
- 1Y
- 28.53%
- 3Y*
- 5.07%
- 5Y*
- 2.31%
- 10Y*
- 9.41%
CNCR
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IHF vs. CNCR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
IHF iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF | 29.17% |
CNCR Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy ETF | 0.00% |
IHF vs. CNCR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
IHF
CNCR
Healthcare
Financial Services
Technology
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Healthcare
IHF
CNCR
Financial Services
IHF
CNCR
Technology
IHF
CNCR
-
Basic Materials
IHF
-
CNCR
-
Communication Services
IHF
-
CNCR
-
Consumer Cyclical
IHF
-
CNCR
-
Consumer Defensive
IHF
-
CNCR
-
Energy
IHF
-
CNCR
-
Industrials
IHF
-
CNCR
-
Real Estate
IHF
-
CNCR
-
Utilities
IHF
-
CNCR
-
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
IHF vs. CNCR — Risk / Return Rank
IHF
CNCR
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
IHF vs. CNCR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF (IHF) and Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy ETF (CNCR). 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.
| IHF | CNCR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.45 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.87 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IHF vs. CNCR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IHF drawdown since its inception was -58.42%, which is greater than CNCR's maximum drawdown of 0.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IHF and CNCR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IHF | CNCR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -58.42% | 0.00% | -58.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.72% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -29.85% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.85% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -35.23% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.08% | 0.00% | -0.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.62% | 0.00% | -10.62% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.40% | — | — |
Volatility
IHF vs. CNCR - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IHF | CNCR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.18% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.38% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.25% | 0.00% | +21.25% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.27% | 0.00% | +19.27% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.03% | 0.00% | +21.03% |
IHF vs. CNCR - Expense Ratio Comparison
IHF has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is lower than CNCR's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
IHF vs. CNCR - Dividend Comparison
IHF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%, while CNCR has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNCR Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IHF iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF | 0.91% | 1.05% | 0.86% | 0.79% | 0.74% | 0.56% | 0.53% | 0.58% | 4.01% | 0.19% | 0.25% | 0.20% |
Frequently Asked Questions
On fees, IHF is cheaper at 0.43% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IHF is cheaper with a 0.43% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for CNCR.
IHF has the higher dividend yield at 0.91%, compared with 0.00% for CNCR.
IHF tracks Dow Jones U.S. Select Health Care Providers Index, while CNCR tracks Loncar Cancer Immunotherapy Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Exchange Traded Concepts. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for IHF and 0.79% for CNCR.
Find the right allocation for IHF and CNCR
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