HUSV vs SBIO
HUSV vs SBIO
First Trust Horizon Managed Volatility Domestic ETF vs ALPS Medical Breakthroughs ETF
Quick Verdict
SBIO has a lower expense ratio. SBIO delivered stronger 1-year returns. SBIO offers more diversification with 105 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | HUSV | SBIO | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.70% | 0.50% | |
| AUM | $74M | $202M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.37% | 4.05% | |
| Holdings | 101 | 87 | |
| YTD Return | +8.58% | +34.80% | |
| 1Y Return | +5.89% | +106.24% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +9.95% | +32.77% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.22% | +9.56% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.2% | 29.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -35.7% | -63.1% | |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | ALPS Advisors | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Aug 24, 2016 | Dec 30, 2014 |
HUSV vs SBIO Performance
First Trust Horizon Managed Volatility Domestic ETF (HUSV) is a ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and ALPS Medical Breakthroughs ETF (SBIO) is a ETF from ALPS Advisors. Over the past year HUSV returned +5.89% while SBIO returned +106.24%. Year to date, HUSV is up 8.58% versus a gain of 34.80% for SBIO.
Over three years, HUSV compounded at +9.95% per year against +32.77% for SBIO; over five years the annualized figures are +6.22% and +9.56% respectively. Across the full 10-year window we track, SBIO has the edge at +9.80% annualized vs +8.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SBIO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 29.6% compared with 13.2% for HUSV. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -35.7% for HUSV and -63.1% for SBIO. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.36. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
HUSV charges 0.70% per year while SBIO charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $70 vs $50 annually, a gap of $20 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, HUSV currently yields 1.37% against 4.05% for SBIO.
Holdings Overlap
HUSV and SBIO share 0 holdings out of 206 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, HUSV or SBIO?
HUSV has an expense ratio of 0.70% while SBIO charges 0.50%. SBIO is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $20 per year of difference.
Which performed better, HUSV or SBIO?
Over the past year HUSV returned +5.89% vs +106.24% for SBIO, so SBIO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (10 years), HUSV annualized +8.52% vs +9.80% for SBIO. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, HUSV or SBIO?
SBIO has been the more volatile fund at 29.6% annualized versus 13.2% for HUSV. Worst drawdown: HUSV -35.7% vs SBIO -63.1%.
Should I hold both HUSV and SBIO?
HUSV and SBIO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.36, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between HUSV and SBIO?
HUSV and SBIO share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 206 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, HUSV or SBIO?
HUSV yields 1.37% while SBIO yields 4.05%, so SBIO currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.