PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

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

IYH vs. AGNG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IYH (iShares U.S. Healthcare ETF) and AGNG (Global X Aging Population ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - IYH tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Health Care Index while AGNG tracks the Indxx Aging Population Thematic Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IYH returned 9.74%/yr vs 9.37%/yr for AGNG. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IYH charges 0.43%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for AGNG.

Performance

IYH vs. AGNG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares U.S. Healthcare ETF (IYH) 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, IYH achieves a -1.09% return, which is significantly higher than AGNG's -2.65% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with IYH having a 9.74% annualized return and AGNG not far behind at 9.37%.

IYH

1D
1.35%
1M
1.93%
YTD
-1.09%
6M
-1.41%
1Y
17.06%
3Y*
6.07%
5Y*
4.59%
10Y*
9.74%

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)

IYH vs. AGNG - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IYH
iShares U.S. Healthcare ETF		-1.09%13.16%2.99%2.14%-4.46%23.41%15.56%20.80%5.80%22.27%
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 IYH and AGNG is 0.81, 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

0.81

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

0.79

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

0.82

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

0.74

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

0.74

The correlation between IYH and AGNG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

IYH vs. AGNG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IYH
AGNG

Healthcare

100.0%
91.2%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

8.9%

Technology

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Healthcare

IYH
100.0%
AGNG
91.2%

Basic Materials

IYH

-

AGNG

-

Communication Services

IYH

-

AGNG

-

Consumer Cyclical

IYH

-

AGNG

-

Consumer Defensive

IYH

-

AGNG

-

Energy

IYH

-

AGNG

-

Financial Services

IYH

-

AGNG

-

Industrials

IYH

-

AGNG

-

Real Estate

IYH

-

AGNG
8.9%

Technology

IYH

-

AGNG

-

Utilities

IYH

-

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 U.S. Healthcare ETF

Global X Aging Population ETF

Often compared with IYH:
IYH vs. VHTIYH vs. XLVIYH vs. SPYIYH vs. IYEIYH vs. IFRAIYH vs. BMEDIYH vs. IBB
Often compared with AGNG:
AGNG vs. AGES.LAGNG vs. XLVAGNG vs. WDNAAGNG vs. SPYAGNG vs. LLYAGNG vs. GDOCAGNG vs. VOO

Return for Risk

IYH vs. AGNG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
IYH
IYH Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
IYH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3333
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IYH Sortino Ratio Rank: 3535
Sortino Ratio Rank
IYH Omega Ratio Rank: 3131
Omega Ratio Rank
IYH Calmar Ratio Rank: 3333
Calmar Ratio Rank
IYH Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
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.

IYH vs. AGNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

IYHAGNGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.13
0.92

+0.21

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.80
1.41

+0.39

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.17

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.61

1.10

+0.51

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.79

2.68

+1.11

IYH vs. AGNG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IYH Sharpe Ratio is 1.13, which is comparable to the AGNG Sharpe Ratio of 0.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IYH 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

IYH vs. AGNG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IYH drawdown since its inception was -43.12%, which is greater than AGNG's maximum drawdown of -30.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IYH and AGNG.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IYHAGNGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-43.12%

-30.58%

-12.54%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.64%

-11.45%

+0.81%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.91%

-14.48%

-3.43%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.91%

-25.66%

+7.75%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.40%

-30.58%

+2.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.36%

-9.10%

+4.74%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.95%

-5.97%

-2.98%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.51%

4.68%

-0.17%

Volatility

IYH vs. AGNG - Volatility Comparison

iShares U.S. Healthcare ETF (IYH) has a higher volatility of 5.14% compared to Global X Aging Population ETF (AGNG) at 4.39%. This indicates that IYH'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

IYHAGNGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.14%

4.39%

+0.75%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.68%

10.31%

+0.37%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.12%

13.70%

+1.42%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.98%

15.23%

-0.25%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.73%

17.14%

-0.41%

IYH vs. AGNG - Expense Ratio Comparison

IYH has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is lower than AGNG's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

IYH vs. AGNG - Dividend Comparison

IYH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.25%, 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%
IYH
iShares U.S. Healthcare ETF		1.25%1.19%1.25%1.18%1.10%0.94%1.16%1.14%1.95%1.10%1.29%2.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

IYH and AGNG have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IYH has higher volatility (5.14%) compared to AGNG (4.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IYH dropped -43.12% vs AGNG's -30.58%.

On 10-year performance, IYH leads with 9.74% vs 9.37% for AGNG. On fees, IYH is cheaper at 0.43% 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, IYH has performed better with a 9.74% return vs 9.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IYH is cheaper with a 0.43% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for AGNG.

IYH has the higher dividend yield at 1.25%, compared with 0.90% for AGNG.

IYH tracks Dow Jones U.S. Health Care Index, while AGNG tracks Indxx Aging Population Thematic Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for IYH and 0.50% for AGNG.

IYH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.13 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 IYH 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