PINK vs. IDNA

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

PINK (Simplify Health Care ETF) and IDNA (iShares Genomics Immunology and Healthcare ETF Genomics Immunology and Healthcare Fund) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. PINK is actively managed, while IDNA is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, PINK returned 14.26%/yr vs 13.16%/yr for IDNA. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PINK charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.47%/yr for IDNA.

Performance

PINK vs. IDNA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Simplify Health Care ETF (PINK) and iShares Genomics Immunology and Healthcare ETF Genomics Immunology and Healthcare Fund (IDNA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PINK achieves a 5.21% return, which is significantly lower than IDNA's 23.81% return.

PINK

• 1D: 0.95%
• 1M: 3.08%
• YTD: 5.21%
• 6M: 3.43%
• 1Y: 29.65%
• 3Y*: 14.26%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IDNA

• 1D: 1.83%
• 1M: 9.00%
• YTD: 23.81%
• 6M: 20.37%
• 1Y: 57.96%
• 3Y*: 13.16%
• 5Y*: -7.66%
• 10Y*: —

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

PINK vs. IDNA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
PINK Simplify Health Care ETF	5.21%	24.34%	8.81%	3.80%	-4.41%	11.45%
IDNA iShares Genomics Immunology and Healthcare ETF Genomics Immunology and Healthcare Fund	23.81%	17.26%	-0.72%	-7.63%	-42.28%	-8.33%

Correlation

The correlation between PINK and IDNA is 0.75, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.75
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 8, 2021	0.69

The correlation between PINK and IDNA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

PINK vs. IDNA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PINK	IDNA
Healthcare	89.5%	99.3%
Industrials	10.5%	0.3%
Financial Services	0.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

PINK vs. IDNA — Risk / Return Rank

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

PINK

PINK Risk / Return Rank: 47
PINK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
PINK Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
PINK Omega Ratio Rank: 48
PINK Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
PINK Martin Ratio Rank: 37

IDNA

IDNA Risk / Return Rank: 83
IDNA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
IDNA Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
IDNA Omega Ratio Rank: 71
IDNA Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
IDNA Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

PINK vs. IDNA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Simplify Health Care ETF (PINK) and iShares Genomics Immunology and Healthcare ETF Genomics Immunology and Healthcare Fund (IDNA). 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.

	PINK	IDNA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.61	2.34	-0.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.34	3.18	-0.85
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.36	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.77	5.46	-3.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.29	15.24	-9.95

PINK vs. IDNA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PINK Sharpe Ratio is 1.61, which is lower than the IDNA Sharpe Ratio of 2.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PINK and IDNA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

PINK vs. IDNA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PINK drawdown since its inception was -18.77%, smaller than the maximum IDNA drawdown of -68.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PINK and IDNA.

Drawdown Indicators

	PINK	IDNA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.77%	-68.26%	+49.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.81%	-10.66%	-6.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.77%	-29.46%	+10.69%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-68.26%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.16%	-38.95%	+38.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.70%	-36.28%	+29.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.62%	3.81%	+1.81%

Volatility

PINK vs. IDNA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Simplify Health Care ETF (PINK) is 5.54%, while iShares Genomics Immunology and Healthcare ETF Genomics Immunology and Healthcare Fund (IDNA) has a volatility of 7.56%. This indicates that PINK experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IDNA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PINK	IDNA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.54%	7.56%	-2.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.83%	18.41%	-4.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.48%	24.97%	-6.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.58%	28.48%	-10.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.58%	29.51%	-11.93%

PINK vs. IDNA - Expense Ratio Comparison

PINK has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than IDNA's 0.47% expense ratio.

Dividends

PINK vs. IDNA - Dividend Comparison

PINK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.65%, less than IDNA's 0.87% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
IDNA iShares Genomics Immunology and Healthcare ETF Genomics Immunology and Healthcare Fund	0.87%	1.18%	0.98%	1.04%	0.54%	0.70%	0.26%	0.80%
PINK Simplify Health Care ETF	0.65%	0.68%	0.32%	0.94%	0.42%	0.04%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PINK and IDNA in my portfolio?

PINK and IDNA have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PINK or IDNA?

IDNA has higher volatility (7.56%) compared to PINK (5.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PINK dropped -18.77% vs IDNA's -68.26%.

Which ETF is better, PINK or IDNA?

On 3-year performance, PINK leads with 14.26% vs 13.16% for IDNA. On fees, IDNA is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, PINK has been the lower-risk option at 5.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PINK or IDNA?

Over the 3-year period, PINK has performed better with a 14.26% return vs 13.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PINK or IDNA?

IDNA is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for PINK.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PINK or IDNA?

IDNA has the higher dividend yield at 0.87%, compared with 0.65% for PINK.

What is the main difference between PINK and IDNA?

They also come from different issuers: Simplify and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PINK and 0.47% for IDNA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IDNA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.34 vs 1.61), 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.