IXJ vs. FHLC

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Global Healthcare ETF (IXJ) and Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC).

IXJ and FHLC are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. IXJ is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the S&P Global Healthcare Sector Index. It was launched on Nov 13, 2001. FHLC is a passively managed fund by Fidelity that tracks the performance of the MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index. It was launched on Oct 21, 2013. Both IXJ and FHLC are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

IXJ vs. FHLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Global Healthcare ETF (IXJ) and Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

IXJ vs. FHLC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IXJ iShares Global Healthcare ETF	-3.96%	14.99%	0.55%	3.62%	-4.94%	19.60%	12.74%	23.23%	2.83%	20.44%
FHLC Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF	-4.97%	15.42%	2.48%	2.58%	-5.55%	20.39%	18.13%	21.94%	4.71%	23.34%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IXJ achieves a -3.96% return, which is significantly higher than FHLC's -4.97% return. Over the past 10 years, IXJ has underperformed FHLC with an annualized return of 8.40%, while FHLC has yielded a comparatively higher 9.60% annualized return.

IXJ

• 1D: 1.96%
• 1M: -8.03%
• YTD: -3.96%
• 6M: 6.20%
• 1Y: 4.10%
• 3Y*: 5.42%
• 5Y*: 5.33%
• 10Y*: 8.40%

FHLC

• 1D: 2.28%
• 1M: -7.46%
• YTD: -4.97%
• 6M: 5.95%
• 1Y: 4.53%
• 3Y*: 6.14%
• 5Y*: 5.07%
• 10Y*: 9.60%

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

IXJ vs. FHLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

IXJ has a 0.46% expense ratio, which is higher than FHLC's 0.08% expense ratio.

IXJ

iShares Global Healthcare ETF

FHLC

Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF

Return for Risk

IXJ vs. FHLC — Risk / Return Rank

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

IXJ

IXJ Risk / Return Rank: 20
IXJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
IXJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
IXJ Omega Ratio Rank: 18
IXJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
IXJ Martin Ratio Rank: 20

FHLC

FHLC Risk / Return Rank: 21
FHLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 20
FHLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
FHLC Omega Ratio Rank: 19
FHLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
FHLC Martin Ratio Rank: 21

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. FHLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	IXJ	FHLC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.24	0.26	-0.02
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.45	0.48	-0.03
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.06	0.00
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.44	0.51	-0.07
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	1.04	1.08	-0.04
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IXJ vs. FHLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IXJ Sharpe Ratio is 0.24, which is comparable to the FHLC Sharpe Ratio of 0.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IXJ and FHLC, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IXJ	FHLC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.24	0.26	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.38	0.34	+0.04
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.54	0.57	-0.03
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.42	0.61	-0.18

Correlation

The correlation between IXJ and FHLC is 0.95, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

IXJ vs. FHLC - Dividend Comparison

IXJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.45%, which matches FHLC's 1.44% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IXJ iShares Global Healthcare ETF	1.45%	1.40%	1.50%	1.38%	1.17%	1.12%	1.27%	1.42%	2.11%	1.46%	1.73%	2.85%
FHLC Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF	1.44%	1.40%	1.51%	1.40%	1.30%	1.16%	1.45%	1.18%	1.38%	1.38%	1.40%	2.07%

Drawdowns

IXJ vs. FHLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IXJ drawdown since its inception was -40.60%, which is greater than FHLC's maximum drawdown of -28.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IXJ and FHLC.

Drawdown Indicators

	IXJ	FHLC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.60%	-28.76%	-11.84%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.35%	-10.38%	+0.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.14%	-17.73%	-0.41%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-27.35%	-28.76%	+1.41%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.03%	-7.99%	-0.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.92%	-5.16%	-1.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.41%	5.04%	-0.63%

Volatility

IXJ vs. FHLC - Volatility Comparison

iShares Global Healthcare ETF (IXJ) and Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) have volatilities of 5.06% and 5.14%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IXJ	FHLC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.06%	5.14%	-0.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.43%	10.26%	+0.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.31%	17.61%	-0.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.07%	14.85%	-0.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.66%	16.82%	-1.16%