LFSC vs. IBRN

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) and iShares Neuroscience and Healthcare ETF (IBRN).

LFSC and IBRN are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. LFSC is an actively managed fund by F/m Investments. It was launched on Oct 30, 2024. IBRN is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the NYSE FactSet Global Neuro Biopharma and MedTech Index. It was launched on Aug 24, 2022.

Performance

LFSC vs. IBRN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) and iShares Neuroscience and Healthcare ETF (IBRN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

LFSC vs. IBRN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF	-4.62%	56.54%	-6.02%
IBRN iShares Neuroscience and Healthcare ETF	2.99%	28.49%	-4.67%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LFSC achieves a -4.62% return, which is significantly lower than IBRN's 2.99% return.

LFSC

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: -3.88%
• YTD: -4.62%
• 6M: 18.37%
• 1Y: 59.47%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IBRN

• 1D: 1.00%
• 1M: 4.90%
• YTD: 2.99%
• 6M: 25.12%
• 1Y: 56.67%
• 3Y*: 12.28%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LFSC vs. IBRN - Expense Ratio Comparison

LFSC has a 0.54% expense ratio, which is higher than IBRN's 0.47% expense ratio.

LFSC

F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF

IBRN

iShares Neuroscience and Healthcare ETF

Return for Risk

LFSC vs. IBRN — Risk / Return Rank

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

LFSC

LFSC Risk / Return Rank: 87
LFSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
LFSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
LFSC Omega Ratio Rank: 84
LFSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
LFSC Martin Ratio Rank: 78

IBRN

IBRN Risk / Return Rank: 87
IBRN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
IBRN Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
IBRN Omega Ratio Rank: 81
IBRN Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
IBRN Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

LFSC vs. IBRN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) and iShares Neuroscience and Healthcare ETF (IBRN). 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.

	LFSC	IBRN	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.06	1.96	+0.10
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.79	2.64	+0.15
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.33	+0.03
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.42	3.27	+0.15
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.51	11.55	-2.04
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LFSC vs. IBRN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LFSC Sharpe Ratio is 2.06, which is comparable to the IBRN Sharpe Ratio of 1.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LFSC and IBRN, 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

	LFSC	IBRN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.06	1.96	+0.10
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.94	0.37	+0.57

Correlation

The correlation between LFSC and IBRN is 0.79, 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

LFSC vs. IBRN - Dividend Comparison

LFSC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IBRN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.96%.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IBRN iShares Neuroscience and Healthcare ETF	0.96%	0.99%	0.40%	0.06%

Drawdowns

LFSC vs. IBRN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LFSC drawdown since its inception was -29.74%, smaller than the maximum IBRN drawdown of -35.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LFSC and IBRN.

Drawdown Indicators

	LFSC	IBRN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.74%	-35.38%	+5.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.25%	-15.44%	-0.81%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.25%	-0.74%	-10.51%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.26%	-10.19%	+1.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.84%	4.37%	+1.47%

Volatility

LFSC vs. IBRN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) is 10.08%, while iShares Neuroscience and Healthcare ETF (IBRN) has a volatility of 12.02%. This indicates that LFSC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IBRN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LFSC	IBRN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.08%	12.02%	-1.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.95%	19.63%	+0.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.12%	29.38%	-0.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.27%	25.39%	+3.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.27%	25.39%	+3.88%