Screener
BMED vs IXJ
iShares Health Innovation Active ETF vs iShares Global Healthcare ETF
Key differences
- IXJ costs 0.15% less per year.
- IXJ is significantly larger than BMED — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- BMED follows a active selection strategy; IXJ uses index tracking.
- IXJ has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| BMED | IXJ | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.55% | 0.40% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $10M | $3.6B |
| Since | 2020 | 2001 |
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 1.46% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | — |
| Strategy | active selection | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +18.0% | +13.6% |
| CAGR 3Y | +4.9% | +5.1% |
| CAGR 5Y | +0.1% | +4.6% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.16 | 0.17 |
| Volatility 1Y | 14.94% | 14.45% |
| Max drawdown | -36.44% | -27.35% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to BMED and IXJ
Explore further