© 2026 Sparkline Capital LP. All rights reserved.

For informational purposes only. Not investment advice or a recommendation of any security or fund. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Disclosures | Methodology |

ANALYTICS
AnalysisScreenerGroups

Selection

Selected (1/4)

Build a portfolio from scratch — the page previews it live

Benchmark

Pick one fund or composite — returns and exposures render in excess of it

Peer Universe

Reference set for percentile ranks and factor bars

No percentile overlays — plain values and bars

ANALYTICS
AnalysisScreenerGroups

Sector - Healthcare

Composite

Peer Group

Expense Ratio
0.65%
#NameTickerAUM
1State Street(R) Health Care Select Sector SPDR(R) ETFXLV$43.4B
2Vanguard Health Care FundVGHCX$39.7B
3Vanguard Health Care Index FundVHT$21.8B
4T. Rowe Price Health Sciences FundPRHSX$12.2B
5Select Health Care PortfolioFSPHX$6.8B
6BlackRock Health Sciences Opportunities PortfolioSHSAX$6.3B
7Janus Henderson Global Life Sciences FundJAGLX$5.8B
8iShares Global Healthcare ETFIXJ$4.3B
9iShares U.S. Healthcare ETFIYH$4B
10Select Medical Technology and Devices PortfolioFSMEX$3.5B
Time Series
–

Performance

NameCumulative ReturnAnn. ReturnAnn. VolSharpeMax DD
Peer Group
17.0%17.0%14.9%0.88-11.3%
ⓘ Methodology

Peer composites equal-weight the group's share-class representatives' daily returns, including delisted members' alive-era history via the frozen year-end snapshots — though our coverage of closed funds is partial, so composite levels at older dates may run slightly high. Membership is the latest known — style migrators carry their full history. ETF performance based on market prices. Drag on chart to select period. Sharpe Ratio uses the one-month T-bill as the risk-free rate. From 10/7/2025 to 10/7/2026.

Trailing Returns

Name
YTD1D5D1M3M6M1Y2Y3Y5YMAX
Peer Group
8.6%0.3%-1.2%-3.5%-0.5%14.2%17.0%8.7%12.1%4.4%12.7%
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. Returns for periods greater than one year are annualized. As of 10/7/2026.

Annual Returns

Name
198119821983198419851986198719881989199019911992199319941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022202320242025YTD
Peer Group
5.2%*38.8%4.8%-3.4%45.4%9.2%-5.0%10.7%40.5%12.4%53.8%-13.1%6.7%7.6%40.3%16.3%18.6%25.6%7.6%56.9%-6.5%-20.6%28.6%12.1%11.6%5.0%10.1%-24.7%29.3%11.2%8.5%18.5%44.4%25.3%7.4%-7.0%22.5%2.1%24.7%23.1%12.8%-11.3%2.8%2.9%16.6%8.6%
ⓘ Methodology

* partial year — the series ran for only part of it (its first year, or the year it closed); the figure is the return over the part it did run. ETF performance based on market prices. As of 10/7/2026.

Correlation Matrix

Benchmark

Select a second series, or to correlate with the seven research factors.

Factor Regression

Name
Ann. αβ MKTβ SMBβ HMLβ RMWβ CMAβ UMDβ iHMLR²Obs
Global Dev
Peer Group
8.9%0.88**0.19-0.17-0.010.34-0.30**-0.040.39226
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. Global Dev factor set. Daily OLS of excess return (fund − T-bill) on factor spread returns over the selected date range, intersected with each series' history. Bold with * |t| ≥ 1.96, ** |t| ≥ 2.58. Cell shading tracks each loading's t-stat. Betas are returns-based — compare with the holdings-based factor scores below. Factor returns are long-short spread returns (© Ken French, Dartmouth). Fama-French publishes daily factors for developed markets only, so Dev Ex-US is developed markets excluding the US and Global Dev is developed markets including it; emerging markets, a small share of world market capitalization, are not covered by the source data. From 10/7/2025 to 8/31/2026.

Factor History

Sector - Healthcare Composite

No metrics selected — use Add metric to chart factors over time.

SnapshotAs ofvsⓘ

Fund Profile

Type
62% ETF, 38% Mutual Fund
Asset Class
97% , 3%
Peer Asset Class
Equity
Region
88% , 12%
Equity Size & Style
Peer Group Benchmark
Peer Group
Sector - Healthcare (69 peers)
1Y Peer Percentile
49
3Y Peer Percentile
49
Expense Ratio
0.65%
5Y Tax Drag
0.57%/yr
Median Member AUM
$557M
3Y Flow
-12.1%
Yield
0.41%
Inception
7/14/1981
Holdings (Reported)
1,552
Turnover
46%
Equity
99%
Derivatives
0%
Net Equity Exposure
100%
ⓘ Methodology

Every figure on this card is an equal-weight aggregate over the composite's share-class-deduped members: the median across the members reporting each field, blank where too few of them do. Three rows depart from that, because a median of them would say nothing: Inception is the group's OLDEST member — where its combined history can start; 3Y Flow is the group's own net flow over its own assets, not the middle member's rate; and Type, Asset Class and Region are compositions by member count. Holdings is the merged look-through book — distinct positions across the members' holdings.

Equity Size & Style Map

LargeMidSmall
18%
26%
20%
6%
4%
10%
-
2%
14%
Large
ValueCoreGrowth
Size
Large
63%
Mid
20%
Small
17%
Style
Value
24%
Core
32%
Growth
44%
ⓘ Methodology

Equity size and style definitions: Large vs. Small based on market cap, where Large > $70B, Mid $10-70B, and Small < $10B. Value vs. Growth based on percentile ranking on Traditional Value score within the fund's region and size cohort (equal thirds among its true equity-fund peers). Cell shading and percentages: share of classified holdings weight per box, from stock-level classification (size on the same $70B/$10B lines; value by Traditional Value terciles across scored stocks). The dot is the average holding ranked against other funds, so dot and weights can differ at the margin. The Size and Style bars are the grid's row and column totals. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Composite Factors

Intangible Value82.2
Traditional Value35.1
Small-Cap58.1
Quality30.9
Momentum65.8
ⓘ Methodology

Hover or click for factor definitions. Weighted average of underlying company-level values with weights equal to position size. Ranked within the clean equity fund universe, one entry per fund series (lowest: 0, highest: 100; the middle of the range is denser than the ends). Blue dots mark the fund's universe-normalized score; percentile overlays are off (Peer Universe: None). Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Factor Details

Valuation
Book-to-Price (NTM)19.8
Sales-to-Price (NTM)40.8
Earnings-to-Price (NTM)3.1
Innovation/IP
R&D / Mkt Cap2.9
Patents / Mkt Cap0.62
Brand
Sales & Marketing / Mkt Cap1.00
Trademarks / Mkt Cap0.12
Human Capital
PhD Employees / Mkt Cap14.3
Top University Alumni / Mkt Cap14.7
Politics
Lobbying Spend / Mkt Cap29.4
AI
AI Employees / Mkt Cap0.99
ⓘ Methodology

Hover or click for factor definitions. Weighted average of underlying company-level values with weights equal to position size. Solid blue dots mark the fund's position within the clean equity fund universe (5th–95th percentile scale); percentile overlays are off (Peer Universe: None). Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Asset Class Exposure

Equity95.8%
Cash & Short-Term3.4%
Other0.8%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares of the fund's long book, from the asset category each position is filed under. Cash & Short-Term includes 0.2% of net assets the filing does not itemise. Other is everything we could not name as an asset class: holdings the filing itself labels as other, derivative positions at the market value the filing reports rather than at notional, and funds held inside this fund whose own holdings we could not read.

Country Exposure

Level
United States85.6%
United States85.6%
Developed Ex-US13.6%
Switzerland3.5%
United Kingdom2.8%
Denmark2.0%
Netherlands1.4%
Japan1.1%
Other2.9%
Other (1 region)0.8%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the holdings that carry a country, not portfolio weights. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Sector Exposure

Level
Healthcare99.0%
Real Estate0.5%
Consumer Discretionary0.1%
Industrials0.1%
Consumer Staples0.1%
Materials0.1%
Technology0.1%
Communication0.0%
Financials0.0%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the fund's classified holdings — every position we can identify, with cash and unidentified positions excluded — not portfolio weights. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Thematic Exposure

AI Composition

Infrastructure3.8%
Early Adopter46.9%
Laggard49.3%

Magnificent 7

Magnificent 70.0%
Non-Magnificent 7100.0%

Old vs New Economy

Old Economy15.2%
New Economy84.8%

Globalization

Multinational54.7%
Exporter2.5%
Importer14.4%
Domestic28.4%

China Exposure

China/HK Domiciled0.8%
Revenue & Operations2.3%
Operations Only21.3%
Revenue Only0.7%
No Material Exposure75.0%

Company Size

Mega (>$500B)12.9%
Large ($70–500B)36.0%
Mid ($10–70B)30.8%
Small ($1–10B)19.1%
Micro (<$1B)1.1%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the fund's classified equity book, renormalized so each split sums to 100% (the equity book is 99% of net assets) — they are not portfolio weights. China exposure: domiciled = incorporated in China or Hong Kong, falling back to the filing's country for holdings outside the stock model. Among the rest, revenue = ≥15% of revenue derived from China; operations = ≥3% of LinkedIn-tracked workforce in China, or ≥2 identified Chinese suppliers making up ≥12% of those identified. China revenue is estimated where segment reporting is absent. Company size bands by holding market cap: Mega >$500B, Large $70–500B, Mid $10–70B, Small $1–10B, Micro <$1B. Old vs New Economy partitions Sparkline's 48 industries: New = technology, internet platforms and entertainment, e-commerce, payments, pharma/biotech/medtech, and renewable energy; Old = everything else. Shares are of classified holdings and sum to 100%. China shares are of total equity weight. Size shares are of scored holdings weight. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Holdings

See more rows — create a free account▾

10 of 69 funds (top 10 shown, create for all 69)

#NameTickerWeight %AUM
1State Street(R) Health Care Select Sector SPDR(R) ETFXLV
1.45
$43.4B
2Vanguard Health Care FundVGHCX
1.45
$39.7B
3Vanguard Health Care Index FundVHT
1.45
$21.8B
4T. Rowe Price Health Sciences FundPRHSX
1.45
$12.2B
5Select Health Care PortfolioFSPHX
1.45
$6.8B
6BlackRock Health Sciences Opportunities PortfolioSHSAX
1.45
$6.3B
7Janus Henderson Global Life Sciences FundJAGLX
1.45
$5.8B
8iShares Global Healthcare ETFIXJ
1.45
$4.3B
9iShares U.S. Healthcare ETFIYH
1.45
$4B
10Select Medical Technology and Devices PortfolioFSMEX
1.45
$3.5B
ⓘ Methodology

The funds this composite is made of, each counting once (100 ÷ 10 — the same equal weighting behind its returns and its median exposures), listed largest first by assets. Tick Look-Through to expand them into the stocks they hold. Holdings Concentration beside this card always describes that looked-through book, not this list — it is a statement about exposure, not about the roster. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Concentration

Total Holdings1,552
Effective Holdings63.6
Top 10 Weight30.5%
Max Position8.3%
Top Sector (of Net Assets)99%
Top Country (of Net Assets)86%
ⓘ Methodology

Hover or click for definitions. Solid blue dots mark the fund: percentage rows on a 0–100% scale, holdings counts log-scaled across the clean-universe 5th–95th percentile range; percentile overlays are off (Peer Universe: None). Every row on this card describes the composite's merged look-through book — the stocks its members hold — not the list of member funds, whatever the Holdings card is showing.

Peer Group Rank

See All Peer Groups
Metric
Sector - Healthcare Composite
69 funds
Peer Asset Class
5,640 funds
YTD Return
8.24%11.63%33
1Y Return
17.69%14.46%66
3Y Return (Ann.)
11.69%18.47%15
5Y Return (Ann.)
4.91%8.64%23
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
0.65%0.74%56
ⓘ Methodology

Sector - Healthcare Composite is a Sparkline peer composite — its members are the share-class representatives of the funds in the group (one class per fund: the exchange-listed class where the SEC series has one, else its longest-history class). This card ranks it against its asset class, Equity, which is the only pool a composite has: there is no peer group of peer groups, and the region tier is a fund-level grouping. Typical Member rows are medians across those representatives — the value is the group’s median, and the percentile is the median of the members’ own ranks within Equity, so both describe the middle fund rather than the group as a whole. Quartile chips fill the layer the rank falls in (top layer = best quartile). A dash is a window the group is younger than, or one too few Equity funds have a history for to rank against — hover it for which.