IHF vs. FHLC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IHF (iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF) and FHLC (Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - IHF tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Select Health Care Providers Index while FHLC tracks the MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IHF returned 8.04%/yr vs 9.14%/yr for FHLC. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IHF charges 0.43%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for FHLC.

Performance

IHF vs. FHLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF (IHF) 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, IHF achieves a 4.65% return, which is significantly higher than FHLC's -3.90% return. Over the past 10 years, IHF has underperformed FHLC with an annualized return of 8.04%, while FHLC has yielded a comparatively higher 9.14% annualized return.

IHF

• 1D: 0.14%
• 1M: 3.63%
• YTD: 4.65%
• 6M: 3.57%
• 1Y: 6.61%
• 3Y*: 0.41%
• 5Y*: -0.52%
• 10Y*: 8.04%

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)

IHF vs. FHLC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IHF iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF	4.65%	0.92%	-7.90%	-1.11%	-7.11%	24.46%	17.67%	22.34%	9.56%	25.45%
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 IHF 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	0.65
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.74
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.75
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2013	0.76

Over the past year, the correlation between IHF and FHLC has dropped to 0.54 - well below their long-term average of 0.76, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

IHF vs. FHLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IHF	FHLC
Healthcare	99.1%	99.6%
Financial Services	0.6%	0.1%
Technology	0.3%	0.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Industrials	-	0.0%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

IHF vs. FHLC — Risk / Return Rank

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

IHF

IHF Risk / Return Rank: 13
IHF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
IHF Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
IHF Omega Ratio Rank: 14
IHF Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
IHF Martin Ratio Rank: 12

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.

IHF vs. FHLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF (IHF) 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.

	IHF	FHLC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.31	1.01	-0.70
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.53	1.58	-1.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.08	1.18	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.34	1.40	-1.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.78	3.52	-2.74
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IHF vs. FHLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IHF Sharpe Ratio is 0.31, which is lower than the FHLC Sharpe Ratio of 1.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IHF 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

	IHF	FHLC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.31	1.01	-0.70
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.03	0.30	-0.33
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.38	0.55	-0.16
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.38	0.61	-0.23

Drawdowns

IHF vs. FHLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IHF drawdown since its inception was -58.42%, which is greater than FHLC's maximum drawdown of -28.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IHF and FHLC.

Drawdown Indicators

	IHF	FHLC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.42%	-28.76%	-29.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.72%	-10.38%	-9.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.85%	-16.87%	-12.98%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.85%	-17.73%	-12.12%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.23%	-28.76%	-6.47%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.16%	-6.96%	-6.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.65%	-5.19%	-5.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.51%	4.11%	+4.40%

Volatility

IHF vs. FHLC - Volatility Comparison

iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF (IHF) has a higher volatility of 5.30% compared to Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) at 4.05%. This indicates that IHF'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

	IHF	FHLC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.30%	4.05%	+1.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.82%	10.11%	+5.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.51%	14.33%	+7.18%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.10%	14.97%	+4.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.00%	16.81%	+4.19%

IHF vs. FHLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

IHF has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is higher than FHLC's 0.08% expense ratio.

Dividends

IHF vs. FHLC - Dividend Comparison

IHF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.07%, 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%
IHF iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF	1.07%	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

Can I hold both IHF and FHLC in my portfolio?

IHF 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, IHF or FHLC?

IHF has higher volatility (5.30%) compared to FHLC (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IHF dropped -58.42% vs FHLC's -28.76%.

Which ETF is better, IHF or FHLC?

On 10-year performance, FHLC leads with 9.14% vs 8.04% for IHF. 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, IHF or FHLC?

Over the 10-year period, FHLC has performed better with a 9.14% return vs 8.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IHF or FHLC?

FHLC is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.43% for IHF.

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

FHLC has the higher dividend yield at 1.43%, compared with 1.07% for IHF.

What is the main difference between IHF and FHLC?

IHF tracks Dow Jones U.S. Select Health Care Providers Index, while FHLC tracks MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for IHF and 0.08% for FHLC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FHLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.01 vs 0.31), 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.