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