PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IHF vs. IDNA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IHF vs. IDNA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF (IHF) and iShares Genomics Immunology and Healthcare ETF Genomics Immunology and Healthcare Fund (IDNA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IHF achieves a 7.93% return, which is significantly lower than IDNA's 14.39% return.


IHF

1D
3.14%
1M
7.98%
YTD
7.93%
6M
6.98%
1Y
10.08%
3Y*
1.25%
5Y*
0.09%
10Y*
8.27%

IDNA

1D
3.70%
1M
1.49%
YTD
14.39%
6M
11.58%
1Y
45.52%
3Y*
8.39%
5Y*
-7.75%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IHF vs. IDNA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
IHF
iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF
7.93%0.92%-7.90%-1.11%-7.11%24.46%17.67%19.04%
IDNA
iShares Genomics Immunology and Healthcare ETF Genomics Immunology and Healthcare Fund
14.39%17.26%-0.72%-7.63%-42.28%-3.98%54.30%20.83%

Correlation

The correlation between IHF and IDNA is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.35

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.36

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.42

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2019

0.44

IHF vs. IDNA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IHF
IDNA

Healthcare

99.1%
97.8%

Financial Services

0.6%

-

Technology

0.3%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Industrials

-

0.4%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Healthcare

IHF
99.1%
IDNA
97.8%

Financial Services

IHF
0.6%
IDNA

-

Technology

IHF
0.3%
IDNA

-

Basic Materials

IHF

-

IDNA

-

Communication Services

IHF

-

IDNA

-

Consumer Cyclical

IHF

-

IDNA

-

Consumer Defensive

IHF

-

IDNA

-

Energy

IHF

-

IDNA

-

Industrials

IHF

-

IDNA
0.4%

Real Estate

IHF

-

IDNA

-

Utilities

IHF

-

IDNA

-

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. IDNA — Risk / Return Rank

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

IHF
IHF Risk / Return Rank: 1616
Overall Rank
IHF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1717
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IHF Sortino Ratio Rank: 1616
Sortino Ratio Rank
IHF Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
IHF Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
IHF Martin Ratio Rank: 1515
Martin Ratio Rank

IDNA
IDNA Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
IDNA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IDNA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
IDNA Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
IDNA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
IDNA Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank
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. IDNA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


IHFIDNADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.39

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.93

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.11

1.30

-0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.51

4.29

-3.78

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.19

12.20

-11.02

IHF vs. IDNA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IHF Sharpe Ratio is 0.47, which is lower than the IDNA Sharpe Ratio of 1.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IHF and IDNA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IHFIDNADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.47

1.85

-1.39

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.00

-0.27

+0.28

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.39

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.39

0.12

+0.27

Drawdowns

IHF vs. IDNA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IHF drawdown since its inception was -58.42%, smaller than the maximum IDNA drawdown of -68.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IHF and IDNA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IHFIDNADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.42%

-68.26%

+9.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-19.72%

-10.66%

-9.06%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.85%

-29.73%

-0.12%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.85%

-68.26%

+38.41%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.23%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-10.44%

-43.60%

+33.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.65%

-36.25%

+25.60%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.51%

3.74%

+4.77%

Volatility

IHF vs. IDNA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF (IHF) is 5.89%, while iShares Genomics Immunology and Healthcare ETF Genomics Immunology and Healthcare Fund (IDNA) has a volatility of 8.09%. This indicates that IHF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IDNA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IHFIDNADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.89%

8.09%

-2.20%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.11%

18.14%

-2.03%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.73%

24.71%

-2.98%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.15%

28.46%

-9.31%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.02%

29.55%

-8.53%

IHF vs. IDNA - Expense Ratio Comparison

IHF has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is lower than IDNA's 0.47% expense ratio.


Dividends

IHF vs. IDNA - Dividend Comparison

IHF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.03%, which matches IDNA's 1.03% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IDNA
iShares Genomics Immunology and Healthcare ETF Genomics Immunology and Healthcare Fund
1.03%1.18%0.98%1.04%0.54%0.70%0.26%0.80%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
IHF
iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF
1.03%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


IHF and IDNA have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IDNA has higher volatility (8.09%) compared to IHF (5.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IHF dropped -58.42% vs IDNA's -68.26%.

On 5-year performance, IHF leads with 0.09% vs -7.75% for IDNA. On fees, IHF is cheaper at 0.43% per year. On volatility, IHF has been the lower-risk option at 5.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, IHF has performed better with a 0.09% return vs -7.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IHF is cheaper with a 0.43% expense ratio, compared with 0.47% for IDNA.

IHF and IDNA have nearly identical dividend yields, around 1.03%.

IHF tracks Dow Jones U.S. Select Health Care Providers Index, while IDNA tracks NYSE FactSet Global Genomics and Immuno Biopharma Index. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for IHF and 0.47% for IDNA.

IDNA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.85 vs 0.47), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IHF and IDNA

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