IYH vs. HRTS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IYH (iShares U.S. Healthcare ETF) and HRTS (Tema Obesity & Cardiometabolic ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. IYH is passively managed, while HRTS is actively managed. Over the past year, IYH returned 13.08% vs 20.97% for HRTS. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IYH charges 0.43%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for HRTS.

Performance

IYH vs. HRTS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares U.S. Healthcare ETF (IYH) and Tema Obesity & Cardiometabolic ETF (HRTS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IYH achieves a -4.19% return, which is significantly higher than HRTS's -5.70% return.

IYH

• 1D: 0.96%
• 1M: 1.98%
• YTD: -4.19%
• 6M: -4.54%
• 1Y: 13.08%
• 3Y*: 5.48%
• 5Y*: 4.59%
• 10Y*: 8.96%

HRTS

• 1D: 0.51%
• 1M: -0.90%
• YTD: -5.70%
• 6M: -5.48%
• 1Y: 20.97%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IYH vs. HRTS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
IYH iShares U.S. Healthcare ETF	-4.19%	13.16%	2.99%	5.90%
HRTS Tema Obesity & Cardiometabolic ETF	-5.70%	23.93%	-4.30%	14.97%

Correlation

The correlation between IYH and HRTS is 0.89, 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	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 22, 2023	0.77

The correlation between IYH and HRTS shifts across timeframes, from 0.77 (all time) to 0.89 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IYH vs. HRTS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IYH	HRTS
Healthcare	100.0%	100.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

IYH vs. HRTS — Risk / Return Rank

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

IYH

IYH Risk / Return Rank: 25
IYH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
IYH Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
IYH Omega Ratio Rank: 23
IYH Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
IYH Martin Ratio Rank: 23

HRTS

HRTS Risk / Return Rank: 36
HRTS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
HRTS Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
HRTS Omega Ratio Rank: 33
HRTS Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
HRTS Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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. HRTS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares U.S. Healthcare ETF (IYH) and Tema Obesity & Cardiometabolic ETF (HRTS). 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.

	IYH	HRTS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.89	1.31	-0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.43	1.99	-0.56
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.23	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.23	1.91	-0.68
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.97	4.83	-1.85
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IYH vs. HRTS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IYH Sharpe Ratio is 0.89, which is lower than the HRTS Sharpe Ratio of 1.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IYH and HRTS, 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

	IYH	HRTS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.89	1.31	-0.42
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.31	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.54	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.43	0.55	-0.13

Drawdowns

IYH vs. HRTS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IYH drawdown since its inception was -43.12%, which is greater than HRTS's maximum drawdown of -25.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IYH and HRTS.

Drawdown Indicators

	IYH	HRTS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-43.12%	-25.81%	-17.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.64%	-11.01%	+0.37%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.91%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.91%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-28.40%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.36%	-9.14%	+1.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.96%	-9.02%	+0.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.41%	4.36%	+0.05%

Volatility

IYH vs. HRTS - Volatility Comparison

iShares U.S. Healthcare ETF (IYH) and Tema Obesity & Cardiometabolic ETF (HRTS) have volatilities of 4.24% and 4.44%, 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

	IYH	HRTS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.24%	4.44%	-0.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.32%	11.26%	-0.94%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.74%	16.03%	-1.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.92%	19.07%	-4.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.72%	19.07%	-2.35%

IYH vs. HRTS - Expense Ratio Comparison

IYH has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is lower than HRTS's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

IYH vs. HRTS - Dividend Comparison

IYH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.30%, less than HRTS's 1.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
HRTS Tema Obesity & Cardiometabolic ETF	1.42%	1.34%	1.63%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IYH iShares U.S. Healthcare ETF	1.30%	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

Can I hold both IYH and HRTS in my portfolio?

IYH and HRTS have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IYH or HRTS?

HRTS has higher volatility (4.44%) compared to IYH (4.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IYH dropped -43.12% vs HRTS's -25.81%.

Which ETF is better, IYH or HRTS?

On 1-year performance, HRTS leads with 20.97% vs 13.08% for IYH. On fees, IYH is cheaper at 0.43% per year. On volatility, IYH has been the lower-risk option at 4.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IYH or HRTS?

Over the 1-year period, HRTS has performed better with a 20.97% return vs 13.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IYH or HRTS?

IYH is cheaper with a 0.43% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for HRTS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IYH or HRTS?

HRTS has the higher dividend yield at 1.42%, compared with 1.30% for IYH.

What is the main difference between IYH and HRTS?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Tema. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for IYH and 0.75% for HRTS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

HRTS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.31 vs 0.89), 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.