Screener
FHLC vs BMED
Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF vs iShares Health Innovation Active ETF
Key differences
- FHLC costs 0.47% less per year.
- FHLC is significantly larger than BMED — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- FHLC follows a index tracking strategy; BMED uses active selection.
- Over the last 3 years, FHLC has delivered higher annualized returns.
- FHLC has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| FHLC | BMED | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.08% | 0.55% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $2.9B | $10M |
| Since | 2013 | 2020 |
| Dividend yield | 1.44% | 0.00% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | active selection |
| CAGR 1Y | +18.3% | +18.7% |
| CAGR 3Y | +6.3% | +4.8% |
| CAGR 5Y | +4.6% | +0.1% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.26 | 0.16 |
| Volatility 1Y | 14.22% | 14.93% |
| Max drawdown | -28.76% | -36.44% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to FHLC and BMED
Explore further