PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IXJ vs. AGNG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IXJ vs. AGNG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IXJ (iShares Global Healthcare ETF) and AGNG (Global X Aging Population ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - IXJ tracks the S&P Global 1200 Health Care (Sector) Capped Index while AGNG tracks the Indxx Aging Population Thematic Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IXJ returned 8.54%/yr vs 9.37%/yr for AGNG. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IXJ charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for AGNG.

Performance

IXJ vs. AGNG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Global Healthcare ETF (IXJ) and Global X Aging Population ETF (AGNG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IXJ achieves a -1.76% return, which is significantly higher than AGNG's -2.65% return. Over the past 10 years, IXJ has underperformed AGNG with an annualized return of 8.54%, while AGNG has yielded a comparatively higher 9.37% annualized return.

IXJ

1D
1.45%
1M
0.89%
YTD
-1.76%
6M
-1.97%
1Y
13.71%
3Y*
5.44%
5Y*
4.16%
10Y*
8.54%

AGNG

1D
0.89%
1M
-2.46%
YTD
-2.65%
6M
-3.59%
1Y
12.53%
3Y*
8.93%
5Y*
3.41%
10Y*
9.37%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IXJ vs. AGNG - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IXJ
iShares Global Healthcare ETF		-1.76%14.99%0.55%3.62%-4.94%19.60%12.74%23.23%2.83%20.44%
AGNG
Global X Aging Population ETF		-2.65%20.01%7.03%9.65%-8.61%3.91%18.96%25.24%-1.45%28.17%

Correlation

The correlation between IXJ and AGNG is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

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

0.86

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

0.84

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

0.85

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.77

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 10, 2016

0.76

The correlation between IXJ and AGNG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

IXJ vs. AGNG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IXJ
AGNG

Healthcare

98.5%
91.2%

Consumer Defensive

0.5%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

8.9%

Technology

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Healthcare

IXJ
98.5%
AGNG
91.2%

Consumer Defensive

IXJ
0.5%
AGNG

-

Basic Materials

IXJ

-

AGNG

-

Communication Services

IXJ

-

AGNG

-

Consumer Cyclical

IXJ

-

AGNG

-

Energy

IXJ

-

AGNG

-

Financial Services

IXJ

-

AGNG

-

Industrials

IXJ

-

AGNG

-

Real Estate

IXJ

-

AGNG
8.9%

Technology

IXJ

-

AGNG

-

Utilities

IXJ

-

AGNG

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Global Healthcare ETF

Global X Aging Population ETF

Often compared with IXJ:
IXJ vs. XLVIXJ vs. VHTIXJ vs. IHIIXJ vs. XDWH.LIXJ vs. FHLCIXJ vs. IVVIXJ vs. HLTH.L
Often compared with AGNG:
AGNG vs. AGES.LAGNG vs. XLVAGNG vs. WDNAAGNG vs. SPYAGNG vs. LLYAGNG vs. GDOCAGNG vs. VOO

Return for Risk

IXJ vs. AGNG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IXJ
IXJ Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
IXJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2727
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IXJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
IXJ Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
IXJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
IXJ Martin Ratio Rank: 2424
Martin Ratio Rank
AGNG
AGNG Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
AGNG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2727
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AGNG Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
AGNG Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
AGNG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
AGNG Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
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.

IXJ vs. AGNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Healthcare ETF (IXJ) and Global X Aging Population ETF (AGNG). 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.

IXJAGNGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.93
0.92

+0.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.49
1.41

+0.08

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.17

1.17

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.28

1.10

+0.18

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.02

2.68

+0.33

IXJ vs. AGNG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IXJ Sharpe Ratio is 0.93, which is comparable to the AGNG Sharpe Ratio of 0.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IXJ and AGNG, 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...

Drawdowns

IXJ vs. AGNG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IXJ drawdown since its inception was -40.60%, which is greater than AGNG's maximum drawdown of -30.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IXJ and AGNG.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IXJAGNGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.60%

-30.58%

-10.02%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.78%

-11.45%

+0.67%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.14%

-14.48%

-3.66%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.14%

-25.66%

+7.52%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-27.35%

-30.58%

+3.23%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.93%

-9.10%

+3.17%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.92%

-5.97%

-0.95%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.56%

4.68%

-0.12%

Volatility

IXJ vs. AGNG - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Healthcare ETF (IXJ) has a higher volatility of 5.06% compared to Global X Aging Population ETF (AGNG) at 4.39%. This indicates that IXJ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AGNG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IXJAGNGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.06%

4.39%

+0.67%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.49%

10.31%

+0.18%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.87%

13.70%

+1.17%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.28%

15.23%

-0.95%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.67%

17.14%

-1.47%

IXJ vs. AGNG - Expense Ratio Comparison

IXJ has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than AGNG's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

IXJ vs. AGNG - Dividend Comparison

IXJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.52%, more than AGNG's 0.90% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
AGNG
Global X Aging Population ETF		0.90%0.88%0.83%0.96%0.49%0.72%0.36%0.83%1.00%1.04%0.45%0.00%
IXJ
iShares Global Healthcare ETF		1.52%1.40%1.50%1.38%1.17%1.12%1.27%1.42%2.11%1.46%1.73%2.85%

Frequently Asked Questions

IXJ and AGNG have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IXJ has higher volatility (5.06%) compared to AGNG (4.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IXJ dropped -40.60% vs AGNG's -30.58%.

On 10-year performance, AGNG leads with 9.37% vs 8.54% for IXJ. On fees, IXJ is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, AGNG has been the lower-risk option at 4.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, AGNG has performed better with a 9.37% return vs 8.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IXJ is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for AGNG.

IXJ has the higher dividend yield at 1.52%, compared with 0.90% for AGNG.

IXJ tracks S&P Global 1200 Health Care (Sector) Capped Index, while AGNG tracks Indxx Aging Population Thematic Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for IXJ and 0.50% for AGNG.

IXJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.93 vs 0.92), 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 IXJ and AGNG

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