MOO vs. FHLC
MOO (VanEck Agribusiness ETF) and FHLC (Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MOO is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the MVIS Global Agribusiness Index, while FHLC is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MOO returned 7.00%/yr vs 9.14%/yr for FHLC. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MOO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for FHLC.
Performance
MOO vs. FHLC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MOO achieves a 10.10% return, which is significantly higher than FHLC's -3.90% return. Over the past 10 years, MOO has underperformed FHLC with an annualized return of 7.00%, while FHLC has yielded a comparatively higher 9.14% annualized return.
MOO
- 1D
- 0.48%
- 1M
- -4.21%
- YTD
- 10.10%
- 6M
- 11.54%
- 1Y
- 13.06%
- 3Y*
- 3.07%
- 5Y*
- -0.70%
- 10Y*
- 7.00%
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%
MOO vs. FHLC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MOO VanEck Agribusiness ETF | 10.10% | 15.61% | -12.43% | -8.57% | -8.10% | 23.99% | 14.59% | 22.29% | -6.03% | 21.75% |
FHLC Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF | -3.90% | 15.42% | 2.48% | 2.58% | -5.55% | 20.39% | 18.13% | 21.94% | 4.71% | 23.34% |
Correlation
The correlation between MOO and FHLC is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.40 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.54 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2013 | 0.60 |
The correlation between MOO and FHLC shifts across timeframes, from 0.40 (1 year) to 0.60 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
MOO vs. FHLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
MOO
FHLC
Consumer Defensive
-
Basic Materials
-
Industrials
Healthcare
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
-
Consumer Defensive
MOO
FHLC
-
Basic Materials
MOO
FHLC
-
Industrials
MOO
FHLC
Healthcare
MOO
FHLC
Communication Services
MOO
-
FHLC
-
Consumer Cyclical
MOO
-
FHLC
-
Energy
MOO
-
FHLC
-
Financial Services
MOO
-
FHLC
Real Estate
MOO
-
FHLC
-
Technology
MOO
-
FHLC
Utilities
MOO
-
FHLC
-
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
MOO vs. FHLC — Risk / Return Rank
MOO
FHLC
MOO vs. FHLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO) 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.
| MOO | FHLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.07 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.15 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 1.18 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.55 | 1.40 | +0.16 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.88 | 3.52 | +0.36 |
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 charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MOO | FHLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.95 | 1.01 | -0.07 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.04 | 0.30 | -0.34 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.39 | 0.55 | -0.16 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.22 | 0.61 | -0.38 |
Drawdowns
MOO vs. FHLC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MOO drawdown since its inception was -69.53%, which is greater than FHLC's maximum drawdown of -28.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MOO and FHLC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MOO | FHLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -69.53% | -28.76% | -40.77% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.45% | -10.38% | +1.93% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.83% | -16.87% | -9.96% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -39.52% | -17.73% | -21.79% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.52% | -28.76% | -10.76% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -17.50% | -6.96% | -10.54% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.97% | -5.19% | -11.78% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.37% | 4.11% | -0.74% |
Volatility
MOO vs. FHLC - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO) and Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) have volatilities of 4.08% and 4.05%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MOO | FHLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.08% | 4.05% | +0.03% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.57% | 10.11% | +0.46% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.88% | 14.33% | -0.45% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.12% | 14.97% | +2.15% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.19% | 16.81% | +1.38% |
MOO vs. FHLC - Expense Ratio Comparison
MOO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than FHLC's 0.08% expense ratio.
Dividends
MOO vs. FHLC - Dividend Comparison
MOO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.24%, more 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% |
MOO VanEck Agribusiness ETF | 2.24% | 2.47% | 3.41% | 2.93% | 2.15% | 1.17% | 1.10% | 1.26% | 1.69% | 1.44% | 2.14% | 2.89% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MOO and FHLC have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MOO has higher volatility (4.08%) compared to FHLC (4.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MOO dropped -69.53% vs FHLC's -28.76%.
On 10-year performance, FHLC leads with 9.14% vs 7.00% for MOO. On fees, FHLC is cheaper at 0.08% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, FHLC has performed better with a 9.14% return vs 7.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FHLC is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for MOO.
MOO has the higher dividend yield at 2.24%, compared with 1.43% for FHLC.
MOO is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while FHLC is Health & Biotech Equities. MOO tracks MVIS Global Agribusiness Index, while FHLC tracks MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for MOO and 0.08% for FHLC.
FHLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.01 vs 0.95), 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 MOO and FHLC
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