XHS vs. AGNG
XHS (SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF) and AGNG (Global X Aging Population ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - XHS tracks the S&P Health Care Services Select Industry Index while AGNG tracks the Indxx Aging Population Thematic Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XHS returned 7.46%/yr vs 8.76%/yr for AGNG. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XHS charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for AGNG.
Performance
XHS vs. AGNG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XHS achieves a 6.32% return, which is significantly higher than AGNG's -4.79% return. Over the past 10 years, XHS has underperformed AGNG with an annualized return of 7.46%, while AGNG has yielded a comparatively higher 8.76% annualized return.
XHS
- 1D
- 0.28%
- 1M
- 2.77%
- YTD
- 6.32%
- 6M
- 5.39%
- 1Y
- 16.58%
- 3Y*
- 8.47%
- 5Y*
- 0.44%
- 10Y*
- 7.46%
AGNG
- 1D
- 0.41%
- 1M
- -2.10%
- YTD
- -4.79%
- 6M
- -5.36%
- 1Y
- 9.81%
- 3Y*
- 8.25%
- 5Y*
- 3.96%
- 10Y*
- 8.76%
XHS vs. AGNG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
XHS SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF | 6.32% | 18.83% | 1.76% | 5.15% | -19.87% | 9.76% | 33.66% | 18.81% | 1.96% | 17.65% |
AGNG Global X Aging Population ETF | -4.79% | 20.01% | 7.03% | 9.65% | -8.61% | 3.91% | 18.96% | 25.24% | -1.45% | 28.17% |
Correlation
The correlation between XHS and AGNG is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2016 | 0.60 |
The correlation between XHS and AGNG shifts across timeframes, from 0.46 (1 year) to 0.67 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
XHS vs. AGNG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XHS
AGNG
Healthcare
Financial Services
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Healthcare
XHS
AGNG
Financial Services
XHS
AGNG
-
Basic Materials
XHS
-
AGNG
-
Communication Services
XHS
-
AGNG
-
Consumer Cyclical
XHS
-
AGNG
-
Consumer Defensive
XHS
-
AGNG
-
Energy
XHS
-
AGNG
-
Industrials
XHS
-
AGNG
-
Real Estate
XHS
-
AGNG
Technology
XHS
-
AGNG
-
Utilities
XHS
-
AGNG
-
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
XHS vs. AGNG — Risk / Return Rank
XHS
AGNG
XHS vs. AGNG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF (XHS) 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.
| XHS | AGNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.22 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.27 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.13 | +0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.39 | 0.86 | +0.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.83 | 2.34 | +1.49 |
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
| XHS | AGNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.95 | 0.72 | +0.22 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.02 | 0.26 | -0.24 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.33 | 0.51 | -0.18 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.57 | 0.53 | +0.03 |
Drawdowns
XHS vs. AGNG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XHS drawdown since its inception was -39.32%, which is greater than AGNG's maximum drawdown of -30.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XHS and AGNG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XHS | AGNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -39.32% | -30.58% | -8.74% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.99% | -11.45% | -0.54% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.81% | -14.48% | -3.33% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -32.62% | -25.66% | -6.96% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.32% | -30.58% | -8.74% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.78% | -11.09% | +9.31% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.20% | -5.95% | -4.25% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.33% | 4.20% | +0.13% |
Volatility
XHS vs. AGNG - Volatility Comparison
SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF (XHS) has a higher volatility of 4.80% compared to Global X Aging Population ETF (AGNG) at 3.87%. This indicates that XHS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AGNG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XHS | AGNG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.80% | 3.87% | +0.93% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.86% | 10.00% | +1.86% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.56% | 13.62% | +3.94% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.10% | 15.22% | +5.88% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.40% | 17.13% | +5.27% |
XHS vs. AGNG - Expense Ratio Comparison
XHS has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than AGNG's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
XHS vs. AGNG - Dividend Comparison
XHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.25%, less than AGNG's 0.92% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AGNG Global X Aging Population ETF | 0.92% | 0.88% | 0.83% | 0.96% | 0.49% | 0.72% | 0.36% | 0.83% | 1.00% | 1.04% | 0.45% | 0.00% |
XHS SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF | 0.25% | 0.27% | 0.38% | 0.23% | 0.19% | 0.20% | 0.23% | 2.37% | 0.34% | 0.22% | 0.28% | 0.93% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XHS and AGNG have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XHS has higher volatility (4.80%) compared to AGNG (3.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XHS dropped -39.32% vs AGNG's -30.58%.
On 10-year performance, AGNG leads with 8.76% vs 7.46% for XHS. On fees, XHS is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, AGNG has been the lower-risk option at 3.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, AGNG has performed better with a 8.76% return vs 7.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XHS is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for AGNG.
AGNG has the higher dividend yield at 0.92%, compared with 0.25% for XHS.
XHS tracks S&P Health Care Services Select Industry Index, while AGNG tracks Indxx Aging Population Thematic Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for XHS and 0.50% for AGNG.
XHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.95 vs 0.72), 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 XHS 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