MHIP vs. AGNG
MHIP (Milliman Healthcare Inflation Plus ETF) and AGNG (Global X Aging Population ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. MHIP is actively managed, while AGNG is passively managed. Their 0.68 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. MHIP charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for AGNG.
Performance
MHIP vs. AGNG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
MHIP
- 1D
- 0.51%
- 1M
- 0.74%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
AGNG
- 1D
- 0.51%
- 1M
- 2.77%
- 6M
- -0.15%
- YTD
- 3.76%
- 1Y
- 12.91%
- 3Y*
- 10.71%
- 5Y*
- 4.80%
- 10Y*
- 10.07%
- ALL TIME*
- 9.86%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $286.52K | $343.74K | $459.46K | |
| $444.11 | $1.02K | $5.73K |
MHIP vs. AGNG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
MHIP Milliman Healthcare Inflation Plus ETF | 0.54% |
AGNG Global X Aging Population ETF | 2.18% |
Correlation
The correlation between MHIP and AGNG is 0.68, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 21, 2026 | 0.68 |
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
MHIP vs. AGNG — Risk / Return Rank
MHIP
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
AGNG
MHIP vs. AGNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Milliman Healthcare Inflation Plus ETF (MHIP) and Global X Aging Population ETF (AGNG). 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.
| MHIP | AGNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.17 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.13 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 2.65 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MHIP vs. AGNG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MHIP drawdown since its inception was -3.09%, smaller than the maximum AGNG drawdown of -30.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MHIP and AGNG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MHIP | AGNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -3.09% | -30.58% | +27.49% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -11.45% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.48% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -25.66% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -30.58% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.08% | -3.11% | +2.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.34% | -5.96% | +4.62% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 4.91% | — |
Volatility
MHIP vs. AGNG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MHIP | AGNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 4.78% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 11.01% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.14% | 14.04% | -2.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.14% | 15.30% | -4.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.14% | 17.21% | -6.07% |
MHIP vs. AGNG - Expense Ratio Comparison
MHIP has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than AGNG's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
MHIP vs. AGNG - Dividend Comparison
MHIP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while AGNG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AGNG Global X Aging Population ETF | 0.88% | 0.88% | 0.83% | 0.96% | 0.49% | 0.72% | 0.36% | 0.83% | 1.00% | 1.04% | 0.45% |
MHIP Milliman Healthcare Inflation Plus ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MHIP and AGNG have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, AGNG is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
AGNG is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for MHIP.
AGNG has the higher dividend yield at 0.88%, compared with 0.00% for MHIP.
They also come from different issuers: Milliman and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for MHIP and 0.50% for AGNG.
Find the right allocation for MHIP and AGNG
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