XPH vs. PSIL

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

XPH (SPDR S&P Pharmaceuticals ETF) and PSIL (AdvisorShares Psychedelics ETF) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds. XPH is passively managed, while PSIL is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, XPH returned 16.62%/yr vs 10.43%/yr for PSIL. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XPH charges 0.35%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for PSIL.

Performance

XPH vs. PSIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Pharmaceuticals ETF (XPH) and AdvisorShares Psychedelics ETF (PSIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XPH achieves a 13.09% return, which is significantly lower than PSIL's 25.04% return.

XPH

• 1D: 1.77%
• 1M: 9.48%
• YTD: 13.09%
• 6M: 12.03%
• 1Y: 55.30%
• 3Y*: 16.62%
• 5Y*: 5.15%
• 10Y*: 5.45%

PSIL

• 1D: 0.56%
• 1M: 1.61%
• YTD: 25.04%
• 6M: 21.09%
• 1Y: 76.10%
• 3Y*: 10.43%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XPH vs. PSIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
XPH SPDR S&P Pharmaceuticals ETF	13.09%	31.60%	4.94%	2.97%	-9.83%	-1.83%
PSIL AdvisorShares Psychedelics ETF	25.04%	74.55%	-19.50%	-25.12%	-67.24%	-42.72%

Correlation

The correlation between XPH and PSIL is 0.58, 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	0.58
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 16, 2021	0.48

The correlation between XPH and PSIL shifts across timeframes, from 0.46 (3 years) to 0.58 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XPH vs. PSIL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XPH	PSIL
Healthcare	100.0%	100.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

XPH vs. PSIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

XPH

XPH Risk / Return Rank: 82
XPH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
XPH Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
XPH Omega Ratio Rank: 75
XPH Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
XPH Martin Ratio Rank: 84

PSIL

PSIL Risk / Return Rank: 60
PSIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
PSIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
PSIL Omega Ratio Rank: 53
PSIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
PSIL Martin Ratio Rank: 50

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.

XPH vs. PSIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Pharmaceuticals ETF (XPH) and AdvisorShares Psychedelics ETF (PSIL). 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.

	XPH	PSIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.55	1.88	+0.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.43	2.50	+0.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.30	+0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.64	3.75	+0.89
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.63	7.83	+8.80

XPH vs. PSIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XPH Sharpe Ratio is 2.55, which is higher than the PSIL Sharpe Ratio of 1.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XPH and PSIL, 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

XPH vs. PSIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XPH drawdown since its inception was -48.03%, smaller than the maximum PSIL drawdown of -92.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XPH and PSIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	XPH	PSIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-48.03%	-92.72%	+44.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.97%	-20.38%	+8.41%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.57%	-64.62%	+41.05%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-31.63%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.97%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-75.68%	+75.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.21%	-76.71%	+59.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.33%	9.75%	-6.42%

Volatility

XPH vs. PSIL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR S&P Pharmaceuticals ETF (XPH) is 6.27%, while AdvisorShares Psychedelics ETF (PSIL) has a volatility of 12.82%. This indicates that XPH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PSIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XPH	PSIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.27%	12.82%	-6.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.67%	28.52%	-11.85%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.77%	42.43%	-20.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.92%	62.98%	-42.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.09%	62.98%	-40.89%

XPH vs. PSIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

XPH has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than PSIL's 1.00% expense ratio.

Dividends

XPH vs. PSIL - Dividend Comparison

XPH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%, less than PSIL's 7.94% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PSIL AdvisorShares Psychedelics ETF	7.94%	10.95%	1.49%	0.24%	2.91%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XPH SPDR S&P Pharmaceuticals ETF	0.53%	0.83%	1.58%	1.28%	1.64%	0.95%	0.47%	0.64%	0.65%	0.67%	0.63%	7.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XPH and PSIL in my portfolio?

XPH and PSIL have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XPH or PSIL?

PSIL has higher volatility (12.82%) compared to XPH (6.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XPH dropped -48.03% vs PSIL's -92.72%.

Which ETF is better, XPH or PSIL?

On 3-year performance, XPH leads with 16.62% vs 10.43% for PSIL. On fees, XPH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, XPH has been the lower-risk option at 6.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XPH or PSIL?

Over the 3-year period, XPH has performed better with a 16.62% return vs 10.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XPH or PSIL?

XPH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for PSIL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XPH or PSIL?

PSIL has the higher dividend yield at 7.94%, compared with 0.53% for XPH.

What is the main difference between XPH and PSIL?

They also come from different issuers: State Street and AdvisorShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for XPH and 1.00% for PSIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XPH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs 1.88), 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.