XHS vs. HEAL

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

XHS (SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF) and HEAL (Global X HealthTech ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - XHS tracks the S&P Health Care Services Select Industry Index while HEAL tracks the Global X HealthTech Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, XHS returned 1.64%/yr vs -14.64%/yr for HEAL. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XHS charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for HEAL.

Performance

XHS vs. HEAL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF (XHS) and Global X HealthTech ETF (HEAL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XHS achieves a 15.40% return, which is significantly higher than HEAL's -10.37% return.

XHS

• 1D: 0.88%
• 1M: 8.42%
• YTD: 15.40%
• 6M: 14.24%
• 1Y: 28.59%
• 3Y*: 11.29%
• 5Y*: 1.64%
• 10Y*: 8.61%

HEAL

• 1D: 1.49%
• 1M: 5.54%
• YTD: -10.37%
• 6M: -12.67%
• 1Y: -16.13%
• 3Y*: -8.12%
• 5Y*: -14.64%
• 10Y*: —

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

XHS vs. HEAL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
XHS SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF	15.40%	18.83%	1.76%	5.15%	-19.87%	9.76%	26.87%
HEAL Global X HealthTech ETF	-10.37%	-0.62%	-2.87%	-12.61%	-29.99%	-14.21%	16.89%

Correlation

The correlation between XHS and HEAL is 0.65, 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	0.65
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.66
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 30, 2020	0.71

The correlation between XHS and HEAL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

XHS vs. HEAL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XHS	HEAL
Healthcare	97.9%	96.5%
Financial Services	2.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	2.9%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

XHS vs. HEAL — Risk / Return Rank

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

XHS

XHS Risk / Return Rank: 47
XHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
XHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
XHS Omega Ratio Rank: 47
XHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
XHS Martin Ratio Rank: 43

HEAL

HEAL Risk / Return Rank: 4
HEAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
HEAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
HEAL Omega Ratio Rank: 4
HEAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
HEAL Martin Ratio Rank: 4

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.

XHS vs. HEAL - 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 HealthTech ETF (HEAL). 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.

	XHS	HEAL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.60	-0.73	+2.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.21	-0.95	+3.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	0.90	+0.39
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.39	-0.53	+2.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.63	-1.01	+7.64

XHS vs. HEAL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XHS Sharpe Ratio is 1.60, which is higher than the HEAL Sharpe Ratio of -0.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XHS and HEAL, 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

XHS vs. HEAL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XHS drawdown since its inception was -39.32%, smaller than the maximum HEAL drawdown of -65.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XHS and HEAL.

Drawdown Indicators

	XHS	HEAL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.32%	-65.76%	+26.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.99%	-30.71%	+18.72%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.81%	-35.78%	+17.97%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-32.62%	-60.36%	+27.74%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.32%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-61.31%	+61.31%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.16%	-43.20%	+33.04%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.32%	15.98%	-11.66%

Volatility

XHS vs. HEAL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF (XHS) is 4.47%, while Global X HealthTech ETF (HEAL) has a volatility of 7.26%. This indicates that XHS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HEAL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XHS	HEAL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.47%	7.26%	-2.79%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.25%	16.63%	-4.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.92%	22.43%	-4.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.13%	26.46%	-5.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.40%	26.28%	-3.88%

XHS vs. HEAL - Expense Ratio Comparison

XHS has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than HEAL's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

XHS vs. HEAL - Dividend Comparison

XHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.22%, less than HEAL's 0.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
HEAL Global X HealthTech ETF	0.37%	0.33%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.03%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XHS SPDR S&P Health Care Services ETF	0.22%	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

Can I hold both XHS and HEAL in my portfolio?

XHS and HEAL have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XHS or HEAL?

HEAL has higher volatility (7.26%) compared to XHS (4.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XHS dropped -39.32% vs HEAL's -65.76%.

Which ETF is better, XHS or HEAL?

On 5-year performance, XHS leads with 1.64% vs -14.64% for HEAL. On fees, XHS is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, XHS has been the lower-risk option at 4.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XHS or HEAL?

Over the 5-year period, XHS has performed better with a 1.64% return vs -14.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XHS or HEAL?

XHS is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for HEAL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XHS or HEAL?

HEAL has the higher dividend yield at 0.37%, compared with 0.22% for XHS.

What is the main difference between XHS and HEAL?

XHS tracks S&P Health Care Services Select Industry Index, while HEAL tracks Global X HealthTech Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for XHS and 0.50% for HEAL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XHS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.60 vs -0.73), 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.