MEDI vs. FHLC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MEDI (Harbor Health Care ETF) and FHLC (Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. MEDI is actively managed, while FHLC is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MEDI returned 12.46%/yr vs 6.14%/yr for FHLC. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MEDI charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for FHLC.

Performance

MEDI vs. FHLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Harbor Health Care ETF (MEDI) and Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with MEDI having a -4.02% return and FHLC slightly higher at -3.90%.

MEDI

• 1D: 1.06%
• 1M: -0.93%
• YTD: -4.02%
• 6M: -4.83%
• 1Y: 18.27%
• 3Y*: 12.46%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FHLC

• 1D: 0.82%
• 1M: 1.50%
• YTD: -3.90%
• 6M: -4.11%
• 1Y: 14.43%
• 3Y*: 6.14%
• 5Y*: 4.50%
• 10Y*: 9.14%

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

MEDI vs. FHLC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
MEDI Harbor Health Care ETF	-4.02%	27.11%	0.58%	24.87%	2.60%
FHLC Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF	-3.90%	15.42%	2.48%	2.58%	2.38%

Correlation

The correlation between MEDI and FHLC 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	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 18, 2022	0.78

The correlation between MEDI and FHLC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

MEDI vs. FHLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MEDI	FHLC
Healthcare	100.0%	99.6%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	0.1%
Industrials	-	0.0%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	0.0%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

MEDI vs. FHLC — Risk / Return Rank

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

MEDI

MEDI Risk / Return Rank: 26
MEDI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
MEDI Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
MEDI Omega Ratio Rank: 24
MEDI Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
MEDI Martin Ratio Rank: 26

FHLC

FHLC Risk / Return Rank: 27
FHLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
FHLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
FHLC Omega Ratio Rank: 26
FHLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
FHLC Martin Ratio Rank: 26

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.

MEDI vs. FHLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harbor Health Care ETF (MEDI) and Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC). 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.

	MEDI	FHLC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.93	1.01	-0.09
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.46	1.58	-0.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.18	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.20	1.40	-0.20
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.59	3.52	+0.07
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MEDI vs. FHLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MEDI Sharpe Ratio is 0.93, which is comparable to the FHLC Sharpe Ratio of 1.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MEDI and FHLC, 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

	MEDI	FHLC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.93	1.01	-0.09
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.30	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.55	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.74	0.61	+0.13

Drawdowns

MEDI vs. FHLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MEDI drawdown since its inception was -19.24%, smaller than the maximum FHLC drawdown of -28.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MEDI and FHLC.

Drawdown Indicators

	MEDI	FHLC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.24%	-28.76%	+9.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.34%	-10.38%	-4.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.24%	-16.87%	-2.37%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-17.73%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-28.76%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.01%	-6.96%	-1.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.28%	-5.19%	+0.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.10%	4.11%	+0.99%

Volatility

MEDI vs. FHLC - Volatility Comparison

Harbor Health Care ETF (MEDI) has a higher volatility of 6.02% compared to Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) at 4.05%. This indicates that MEDI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FHLC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MEDI	FHLC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.02%	4.05%	+1.97%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.42%	10.11%	+5.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.82%	14.33%	+5.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.63%	14.97%	+3.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.63%	16.81%	+1.82%

MEDI vs. FHLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

MEDI has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than FHLC's 0.08% expense ratio.

Dividends

MEDI vs. FHLC - Dividend Comparison

MEDI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.29%, less than FHLC's 1.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FHLC Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF	1.43%	1.40%	1.51%	1.40%	1.30%	1.16%	1.45%	1.18%	1.38%	1.38%	1.40%	2.07%
MEDI Harbor Health Care ETF	0.29%	0.28%	0.54%	1.86%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MEDI and FHLC in my portfolio?

MEDI and FHLC 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.

Which is riskier, MEDI or FHLC?

MEDI has higher volatility (6.02%) compared to FHLC (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MEDI dropped -19.24% vs FHLC's -28.76%.

Which ETF is better, MEDI or FHLC?

On 3-year performance, MEDI leads with 12.46% vs 6.14% for FHLC. On fees, FHLC is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, FHLC has been the lower-risk option at 4.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MEDI or FHLC?

Over the 3-year period, MEDI has performed better with a 12.46% return vs 6.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MEDI or FHLC?

FHLC is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for MEDI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MEDI or FHLC?

FHLC has the higher dividend yield at 1.43%, compared with 0.29% for MEDI.

What is the main difference between MEDI and FHLC?

They also come from different issuers: Harbor and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for MEDI and 0.08% for FHLC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FHLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.01 vs 0.93), 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.