Screener
IDNA vs IHF
iShares Genomics Immunology and Healthcare ETF vs iShares U.S. Healthcare Providers ETF
Key differences
- IHF costs 0.09% less per year.
- IHF is significantly larger than IDNA — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- Over the last 3 years, IDNA has delivered higher annualized returns.
- IHF has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| IDNA | IHF | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.47% | 0.38% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $160M | $777M |
| Since | 2019 | 2006 |
| Dividend yield | 1.05% | 1.11% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | — | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +49.2% | +7.9% |
| CAGR 3Y | +8.0% | +1.4% |
| CAGR 5Y | -7.5% | -0.0% |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.29 | -0.01 |
| Volatility 1Y | 24.43% | 21.56% |
| Max drawdown | -68.26% | -35.23% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to IDNA and IHF
Explore further