LFSC vs. IHF
Compare and contrast key facts about F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) and iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF (IHF).
LFSC and IHF 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. IHF is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Dow Jones U.S. Select Health Care Providers Index. It was launched on May 5, 2006.
Performance
LFSC vs. IHF - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
LFSC vs. IHF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF | -4.62% | 56.54% | -6.02% |
IHF iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF | -11.80% | 0.92% | -7.50% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LFSC achieves a -4.62% return, which is significantly higher than IHF's -11.80% return.
LFSC
- 1D
- -0.19%
- 1M
- -3.88%
- YTD
- -4.62%
- 6M
- 18.37%
- 1Y
- 59.47%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IHF
- 1D
- 0.72%
- 1M
- -8.08%
- YTD
- -11.80%
- 6M
- -13.91%
- 1Y
- -19.13%
- 3Y*
- -4.32%
- 5Y*
- -2.61%
- 10Y*
- 6.59%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
LFSC vs. IHF - Expense Ratio Comparison
LFSC has a 0.54% expense ratio, which is higher than IHF's 0.43% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
LFSC vs. IHF — Risk / Return Rank
LFSC
IHF
LFSC vs. IHF - 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 U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF (IHF). 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 | IHF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.06 | -0.79 | +2.85 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.79 | -0.91 | +3.71 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | 0.87 | +0.48 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.42 | -0.77 | +4.18 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.51 | -1.40 | +10.91 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| LFSC | IHF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.06 | -0.79 | +2.85 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | -0.14 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.32 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.94 | 0.34 | +0.59 |
Correlation
The correlation between LFSC and IHF is 0.36, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Dividends
LFSC vs. IHF - Dividend Comparison
LFSC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IHF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.26%.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IHF iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF | 1.26% | 1.05% | 0.86% | 0.79% | 0.74% | 0.56% | 0.53% | 0.58% | 4.01% | 0.19% | 0.25% | 0.20% |
Drawdowns
LFSC vs. IHF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LFSC drawdown since its inception was -29.74%, smaller than the maximum IHF drawdown of -58.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LFSC and IHF.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| LFSC | IHF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -29.74% | -58.42% | +28.68% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.25% | -25.16% | +8.91% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -29.85% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -35.23% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -11.25% | -26.81% | +15.56% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.26% | -10.59% | +2.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.84% | 13.78% | -7.94% |
Volatility
LFSC vs. IHF - Volatility Comparison
F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) has a higher volatility of 10.08% compared to iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF (IHF) at 5.01%. This indicates that LFSC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IHF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| LFSC | IHF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.08% | 5.01% | +5.07% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.95% | 15.73% | +4.22% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 29.12% | 24.20% | +4.92% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 29.27% | 18.90% | +10.37% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 29.27% | 20.94% | +8.33% |