XLV.USvsIBB.US

10-Year Study

The Verdict

Over the synchronized 10-year period measured, XLV.US historically led across 11 distinct risk and return vectors.
XLV.US generated a 10-year CAGR of 10.4% (Max Drawdown: 15.6%), while IBB.US generated 7.2% (Max Drawdown: 33.6%).

XLV.US
8
metric wins
10.4% CAGR
VS
IBB.US
3
metric wins
7.2% CAGR
XLV.US led on more metrics

Head-to-Head StatisticsiDetailed side-by-side breakdown of return and risk metrics.

10Y CAGRCAGRCompound Annual Growth Rate — the annualized rate of return over a period, accounting for compounding.Click for full definition →
XLV.US
+10.4%
VS
IBB.US
+7.2%
5Y CAGRCAGRCompound Annual Growth Rate — the annualized rate of return over a period, accounting for compounding.Click for full definition →
XLV.US
+6.9%
VS
IBB.US
+3.3%
3Y CAGRCAGRCompound Annual Growth Rate — the annualized rate of return over a period, accounting for compounding.Click for full definition →
XLV.US
+10.4%
VS
IBB.US
+16.3%
1Y CAGRCAGRCompound Annual Growth Rate — the annualized rate of return over a period, accounting for compounding.Click for full definition →
XLV.US
+22.4%
VS
IBB.US
+39.1%
Max DrawdownMax DrawdownThe largest peak-to-trough decline in the asset's value over the measurement period.Click for full definition →
lower is better
XLV.US
-15.6%
VS
IBB.US
-33.6%
Sharpe RatioSharpe RatioRisk-adjusted return: how much excess return you earn per unit of total risk (volatility).Click for full definition →
XLV.US
0.45
VS
IBB.US
0.24
Sortino RatioSortino RatioLike Sharpe, but only penalizes downside volatility — a more accurate risk measure for asymmetric return distributions.Click for full definition →
XLV.US
0.83
VS
IBB.US
0.40
Ann. VolatilityAnnualized VolatilityThe annualized standard deviation of an asset's returns — a measure of how much prices fluctuate.Click for full definition →
lower is better
XLV.US
+14.5%
VS
IBB.US
+19.5%
% Positive Years% Positive YearsThe percentage of calendar years in the measurement period where the asset delivered a positive return.Click for full definition →
XLV.US
+90.0%
VS
IBB.US
+70.0%
Dividend YieldDividend YieldAnnual dividend paid per share divided by the current share price — expressed as a percentage income return.Click for full definition →
XLV.US
+1.6%
VS
IBB.US
+0.2%
10Y Income ($10k)
XLV.US
$0
VS
IBB.US
$0
BetaBetaA measure of an asset's sensitivity to broad market movements relative to a benchmark (e.g. S&P 500).Click for full definition →
lower = less market sensitivity
XLV.US
0.51
VS
IBB.US
0.69

XLV.US vs IBB.US: In-Depth AnalysisiData-driven narrative breakdown of volatility, sector exposure, and income characteristics.

Volatility & Variance: Reading the Risk Fingerprint

XLV.US (Health Care Select Sector SPDR® Fund) carries an annualised volatility of 14.5%, categorised as moderate relative to the long-run US equity benchmark of approximately 15%. IBB.US (iShares Biotechnology ETF) registers at 19.5%, a elevated reading by the same standard.

IBB.US is marginally more volatile than XLV.US by 5.0% annualised. For most US long-term investors this difference is unlikely to be psychologically meaningful, though it will compound over multi-decade holding periods.

On the downside, XLV.US's maximum peak-to-trough drawdown of 15.6% represents a notable pullback over the study period. IBB.US's worst drawdown of 33.6% was a severe bear-market drawdown. XLV.US demonstrated stronger capital preservation during the period's worst stress events, which is particularly relevant for US investors approaching retirement or drawing down a portfolio.

When evaluating these two funds for a US-domiciled portfolio, it is important to consider that volatility and drawdown metrics are calculated on trailing historical data. Past standard deviations do not guarantee future behaviour, particularly around US Federal Reserve policy shifts, which have historically been the primary driver of cross-asset correlation breakdowns.

US Market Sector Exposure & Concentration Risk

XLV.US is positioned primarily within US Equity. IBB.US's exposure tilts toward US Equity. This sector divergence is one of the key structural drivers of the return and risk differences observed between the two funds over the study window.

For US investors building a diversified portfolio, the sector overlap — or lack thereof — between these two funds directly affects the marginal diversification benefit of holding both. Because both funds draw from the same US sector universe, holding both is unlikely to meaningfully reduce concentration risk beyond what either fund provides individually. An allocation to an uncorrelated asset class — such as US Treasury bonds (TLT) or commodities (PDBC) — would provide greater portfolio-level risk reduction.

Sector concentration is particularly consequential in the US equity market, where the top five S&P 500 holdings — Apple (AAPL), Microsoft (MSFT), Nvidia (NVDA), Amazon (AMZN), and Alphabet (GOOGL) — have at times represented over 25% of the total index by market capitalisation. Funds with heavy US Technology exposure amplify this mega-cap concentration risk, while broader market or equal-weight funds dilute it.

Dividend Yield, Income Generation & US Tax Considerations

XLV.US currently yields 1.60% annually, while IBB.US yields 0.22%. On a $10,000 initial investment held over the study period, XLV.US generated approximately $0 in cumulative income distributions versus $0 for IBB.US — a gap of $0 in favour of XLV.US.

For US taxable account holders, the character of dividend distributions matters as much as the yield itself. Qualified dividends — those from US corporations held longer than the required 60-day holding period — are taxed at preferential long-term capital gains rates (0%, 15%, or 20% depending on income bracket). Non-qualified or ordinary dividends are taxed as ordinary income, which can reach 37% for high earners. US investors should consult their own tax advisors to understand which distribution category applies to each fund's payout history.

Income-focused US investors — particularly those using tax-advantaged accounts such as a 401(k), IRA, or Roth IRA — can compound dividend distributions without immediate tax drag. In a taxable brokerage account, a higher-yielding fund may generate less after-tax wealth than a lower-yielding fund with equivalent total return, depending on the investor's marginal tax rate. The total return (price appreciation plus reinvested dividends) is generally the more complete measure of long-term performance.

XLV.US's higher yield of 1.60% may appeal to US retirees or income-oriented investors who require regular cash flow from their portfolio. However, a higher yield is not automatically superior — it must be evaluated alongside payout sustainability, CAGR, and the fund's underlying sector composition.

Historical Trajectory

Growth of $10,000 Over 10 Years

Annual Returns Comparison

Performance Consistency

Rolling 12-Month Returns

Risk & Factor X-Ray AnalysisiAnalyzes downside volatility and macro factor exposures.

Proprietary StressScore™= round((Annualised Volatility × 0.5 + |Max Drawdown| × 0.5) × 100)

15/100
XLV.US
Low Stress
Vol
14.5%
MDD
-15.6%
27/100
IBB.US
Moderate Stress
Vol
19.5%
MDD
-33.6%

Historical Drawdowns

Return Correlation

77%
Pearson Correlation Coefficient

Moderately correlated. They share macro drivers but offer identifiable divergence.

Risk X-Ray Macro Factor Exposure Mapping

XLV.US Factor Exposure
View full factor risk breakdown
FactorRisk Exposure
VTI.US0.7%
VEA.US-1.4%
VWO.US-1.4%
QQQ.US-5.5%
VTV.US9.0%
IJR.US-4.4%
QUAL.US27.9%
SHV.US57.6%
TLT.US2.8%
LQD.US-1.4%
HYG.US2.5%
GLD.US0.4%
USO.US1.8%
VNQ.US0.7%
BTC-USD.CC0.2%
CPER.US0.5%
VIX.INDX0.4%
UUP.US1.0%
TIP.US-0.2%
Idiosyncratic8.8%
IBB.US Factor Exposure
View full factor risk breakdown
FactorRisk Exposure
VTI.US40.9%
VEA.US0.3%
VWO.US-1.5%
QQQ.US-13.1%
VTV.US-7.5%
IJR.US0.9%
QUAL.US14.2%
SHV.US40.6%
TLT.US1.2%
LQD.US3.7%
HYG.US5.4%
GLD.US0.1%
USO.US2.1%
VNQ.US-0.0%
BTC-USD.CC-0.5%
CPER.US0.0%
VIX.INDX-1.8%
UUP.US0.8%
TIP.US0.7%
Idiosyncratic13.4%

XLV.US vs IBB.US: Fees, Fund Structure & Portfolio Fundamentals

Side-by-side metric evaluation across valuation, profitability, fees, structure, and balance-sheet health.

Metric
XLV.US
IBB.US
Fund Structure & Fees
Expense Ratio
0.09%
0.45%
Assets Under Management (AUM)
$41.7B
$9.5B
Holdings Count
49
240
Valuation Multiples
Portfolio P/E Ratio
Price-to-Sales (P/S)
1.41x
5.50x
Price-to-Book (P/B)
4.00x
4.78x
Dividend Yield
Annual Dividend Yield
1.6%
0.2%
Market Sentiment
Short Squeeze Risk
Low
Low

Momentum & Macro PositioningiCompares relative price trends, moving averages, and market sensitivity.

50-Day SMA

XLV.US+4.2%
IBB.US+3.0%

200-Day SMA

XLV.US+7.4%
IBB.US+8.7%

Beta (Market Risk)

XLV.US0.51
IBB.US0.69

Trend SignalGolden Cross & Death CrossTechnical chart patterns that occur when a short-term moving average crosses over a long-term moving average.Click for full definition →

XLV.US
GOLDEN CROSS
IBB.US
GOLDEN CROSS

RSI (14-Day)Relative Strength Index (RSI)A momentum oscillator that measures the speed and change of price movements to identify overbought or oversold conditions.Click for full definition →

XLV.US
52
Neutral
IBB.US
43
Neutral

Frequently Asked Questions

How did XLV.US compare to IBB.US historically?

XLV.US (Health Care Select Sector SPDR® Fund) led across 11 measured metrics over the 20162026 study window, including higher risk-adjusted returns. That said, IBB.US may appeal to investors prioritizing income or lower volatility. Past performance does not guarantee future results.

What is the 10-year CAGR of XLV.US vs IBB.US?

Over the 20162026 study period, XLV.US produced an annualized return (CAGR) of 10.4% while IBB.US produced 7.2%. A ${10,000} investment in XLV.US would have grown to approximately $25,552, compared to $19,825 for IBB.US.

What is the maximum drawdown of XLV.US vs IBB.US?

XLV.US experienced a peak-to-trough drawdown of 15.6% (2022 was its worst year at -2.1%), versus 33.6% for IBB.US (worst year 2022 at -13.7%). A smaller maximum drawdown indicates lower downside risk and is particularly important for investors close to or in retirement.

How correlated are XLV.US and IBB.US?

XLV.US and IBB.US have a Pearson return correlation of 77% over the study period. This moderate correlation means the ETFs share broad market drivers but show identifiable divergence, offering some diversification benefit when combined.

Which ETF has a better Sharpe ratio — XLV.US or IBB.US?

XLV.US has a Sharpe ratio of 0.45 versus 0.24 for IBB.US. The Sharpe ratio measures return per unit of risk (volatility) relative to a risk-free rate. XLV.US delivered better risk-adjusted returns over the study period. XLV.US had annualized volatility of 14.5% vs 19.5% for IBB.US.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend — XLV.US or IBB.US?

XLV.US has a dividend yield of 1.60%, while IBB.US yields 0.22%. On a $10,000 investment, XLV.US paid approximately $0 in cumulative income vs $0 for IBB.US over the study period. Income-focused investors should weigh dividend yield alongside total return (price appreciation + dividends), since a lower-yielding ETF can still produce superior total returns through capital gains.

Popular ETF Comparisons

Build a Portfolio with XLV.US or IBB.US

Want to see how exactly these ETFs impact your actual portfolio? Run a Monte Carlo simulation or DCA backtest instantly on StressTest.pro.

Run a Custom Backtest