MDEV vs. LFSC
MDEV (First Trust Indxx Medical Devices ETF) and LFSC (F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. MDEV is passively managed, while LFSC is actively managed. Over the past year, MDEV returned -0.51% vs 78.20% for LFSC. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MDEV charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.54%/yr for LFSC.
Performance
MDEV vs. LFSC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MDEV achieves a -4.66% return, which is significantly lower than LFSC's 22.64% return.
MDEV
- 1D
- 1.70%
- 1M
- 6.61%
- 6M
- -7.63%
- YTD
- -4.66%
- 1Y
- -0.51%
- 3Y*
- -1.56%
- 5Y*
- -4.76%
- 10Y*
- —
LFSC
- 1D
- -2.82%
- 1M
- 11.09%
- 6M
- 24.03%
- YTD
- 22.64%
- 1Y
- 78.20%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MDEV vs. LFSC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
MDEV First Trust Indxx Medical Devices ETF | -4.66% | 2.00% | -3.88% |
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF | 22.64% | 56.54% | -6.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between MDEV and LFSC is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 31, 2024 | 0.53 |
The correlation between MDEV and LFSC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
MDEV vs. LFSC — Risk / Return Rank
MDEV
LFSC
MDEV vs. LFSC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Indxx Medical Devices ETF (MDEV) and F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC). 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.
| MDEV | LFSC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.98 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.76 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.46 | -0.45 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.03 | 4.84 | -4.87 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.06 | 13.69 | -13.75 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MDEV vs. LFSC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MDEV drawdown since its inception was -42.34%, which is greater than LFSC's maximum drawdown of -29.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MDEV and LFSC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MDEV | LFSC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -42.34% | -29.74% | -12.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.13% | -16.25% | -1.88% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.50% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.34% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -28.65% | -5.21% | -23.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -25.76% | -7.34% | -18.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.28% | 5.73% | +2.55% |
Volatility
MDEV vs. LFSC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for First Trust Indxx Medical Devices ETF (MDEV) is 5.61%, while F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF (LFSC) has a volatility of 6.88%. This indicates that MDEV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LFSC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MDEV | LFSC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.61% | 6.88% | -1.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.58% | 19.00% | -6.42% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.66% | 26.66% | -10.00% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.09% | 28.76% | -9.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.98% | 28.76% | -9.78% |
MDEV vs. LFSC - Expense Ratio Comparison
MDEV has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than LFSC's 0.54% expense ratio.
Dividends
MDEV vs. LFSC - Dividend Comparison
MDEV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.11%, while LFSC has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM |
|---|---|
LFSC F/m Emerald Life Sciences Innovation ETF | 0.00% |
MDEV First Trust Indxx Medical Devices ETF | 0.11% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MDEV and LFSC have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LFSC has higher volatility (6.88%) compared to MDEV (5.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MDEV dropped -42.34% vs LFSC's -29.74%.
On 1-year performance, LFSC leads with 78.20% vs -0.51% for MDEV. On fees, LFSC is cheaper at 0.54% per year. On volatility, MDEV has been the lower-risk option at 5.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, LFSC has performed better with a 78.20% return vs -0.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LFSC is cheaper with a 0.54% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for MDEV.
MDEV has the higher dividend yield at 0.11%, compared with 0.00% for LFSC.
They also come from different issuers: First Trust and F/m Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for MDEV and 0.54% for LFSC.
LFSC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.95 vs -0.03), 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.
Find the right allocation for MDEV and LFSC
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