IHI vs KRE: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk

IHI and KRE are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. IHI is iShares U.S. Medical Devices ETF, while KRE is State Street SPDR S&P Regional Banking ETF. KRE is broader by holdings count, with 160 positions versus 49 for IHI. IHI is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has KRE ahead on AIQ Score, 69 versus 57.

Market data as of Oct 31, 2026 market close· Fund characteristics as of Oct 31, 2026
IHI
IShares
vs
KRE
SPDR
IHI
iShares U.S. Medical Devices ETF
Issuer
IShares
Inception
2006-05-01
KRE
State Street SPDR S&P Regional Banking ETF
Issuer
SPDR
Inception
2006-06-19

What is the main difference between IHI and KRE?

KRE holds 160 positions to IHI's 49, and 0% of their weight is in the same securities.

Expense ratio
IHI
0.37%
KRE
0.35%
Lower annual fund costKRE
Holdings
IHI
49
KRE
160
Broader reported basketKRE
1Y return
IHI
-11.7%
KRE
+17.8%
Trailing performanceKRE
Annualized volatility
IHI
20.5%
KRE
20.4%
Lower realized volatilityKRE
MetricIHIKRE
Fund
Expense ratio0.37%0.35%
Holdings49160
Top-10 concentration74.2%14.1%
Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months0.48%2.24%
Average volume2,860,75913,506,045
Performance
1Y return-11.7%+17.8%
YTD return-12.1%+11.3%
5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested-3.1%+2.5%
Risk
Annualized volatility20.5%20.4%
Max drawdown (1Y)-26.2%-14.9%
Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested-32.4%-52.7%
Beta0.400.59
Sharpe ratio-0.700.74
Sortino ratio-1.111.12
AlgovestIQ
AIQ Score57/10069/100
AIQ Edge Score6/1010/10
Momentum79/10076/100
Risk Resilience70/10075/100

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

iShares U.S. Medical Devices ETF vs State Street SPDR S&P Regional Banking ETF

Data as of Oct 31, 2026· market close· Sector ETFs· Coverage 64/66 fields· High confidence
AIQ VerdictStableAIQ Comparison Conviction 8/10

KRE leads

KRE leads by 12 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, and the lead has widened from 9 points over 30 sessions.

Stable: 3 of 4 evidence groups support KRE, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.

Evidence agreement: 3 of 4Comparison trend: Strengthening
IHI

iShares U.S. Medical Devices ETF

AIQ Score
57/100
AIQ Edge Score
6/10
KRE

State Street SPDR S&P Regional Banking ETF

Leads
AIQ Score
69/100
AIQ Edge Score
10/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors KRE over IHI, 69 versus 57 as of Oct 31, 2026. KRE's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality. KRE also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor KRE today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. KRE lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 9 to 12 points over 30 sessions.

Compare iShares U.S. Medical Devices ETF and State Street SPDR S&P Regional Banking ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.

IHI vs KRE: which fits what

Each row is settled by a single measure. Where the gap is too small to matter it reads Similar, and no row decides the comparison as a whole.

If you wantIHIKREFits
Lower costExpense ratio0.37%0.35%KRE
Broader diversificationNumber of holdings49160KRE
Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings74.2%14.1%KRE
Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield0.48%2.24%KRE
Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years-32.4%-52.7%IHI
Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year20.5%20.4%Similar

Similar means the gap is within 0.01 percentage points of expense ratio, 25% more holdings, 3 points of top-10 weight, 0.2 points of yield, 2 points of drawdown or 1 point of volatility. Past drawdowns and volatility describe the funds’ history, not their future.

Currently unavailable

Performance over time

Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes for both ETFs.

IHI
-14.6%
KRE
+12.9%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested

IHI $8,542 · KRE $11,289

Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.

Compare IHI and KRE against another ticker

Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.

Basic: 2 symbols·Explorer: 3 symbols·Pro and Premium: 5 symbols·Your limit: 2

AIQ Factor Divergence

Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.

IHI advantage
0
KRE advantage
  • Value31 vs 65
    KRE +34
  • Quality59 vs 65
    KRE +6
  • Risk Resilience70 vs 75
    KRE +5
  • Momentum79 vs 76
    Even

3 of 4 evidence groups favor KRE. KRE’s edge is concentrated in value and quality.

What changed since the last close

Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.

IHI0 AIQ

Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.

KRE-2 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum -4

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.

KRE's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.

Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — IHI and KRE both carry a full feed there.

The central trade-off

KRE (State Street SPDR S&P Regional Banking ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.

IHI (iShares U.S. Medical Devices ETF): the counter-case, on technicals.

Fund facts, side by side

Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.

MeasureIHIKREWhy it matters
Expense ratio0.37%0.35%Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold.
Holdings49160More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns.
Average volume2,860,75913,506,045Liquidity — matters most if you trade size.
Annualized volatility20.5%20.4%Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure.
Max drawdown (1Y)-26.2%-14.9%The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year.
Sharpe ratio-0.700.74Return per unit of risk. Higher is better.
Beta0.400.59Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio.

Where the exposure actually sits

Sector exposure for each fund, ordered by the size of the difference.

Health Care Equipment99.8% vs 0.0%
Cash and/or Derivatives0.2% vs 0.0%
Financial Services0.0% vs 100.0%
IHIKRE

How much of the same holdings they own

IHI and KRE share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings.

46 holdings are unique to IHI, and 158 holdings are unique to KRE. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

IHI is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 74.18% of the fund, against 14.11% for KRE (49 holdings vs 160). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.

What IHI adds that KRE doesn’t

HoldingIHIKRE
ABTABBOTT LABORATORIES18.88%Not held
ISRGINTUITIVE SURGICAL12.88%Not held
SYKSTRYKER9.79%Not held
BDXABECTON DICKINSON5.28%Not held
0Y6X.LMEDTRONIC PLC4.97%Not held
DXCMDEXCOM INC4.82%Not held

What KRE adds that IHI doesn’t

HoldingKREIHI
CFRCULLEN/FROST BANKERS INC1.48%Not held
SSBSOUTHSTATE BANK CORP1.44%Not held
HOMBHOME BANCSHARES INC1.42%Not held
CFGCITIZENS FINANCIAL GROUP1.41%Not held
CBSHCOMMERCE BANCSHARES INC1.4%Not held
MTBM + T BANK CORP1.4%Not held

Each list is a fund’s largest positions by weight that the other fund does not hold, or holds at less than half the weight.

IHI vs KRE: five-year payout growth

IHI grew its split-adjusted payout faster over 2020-2025 — 9.37% a year against KRE's 1.93%.

Dividend metricIHIKRE
5Y payout CAGR9.37%1.93%
2020 annual payout$0.136$1.443
2025 annual payout$0.212$1.587
Calendar-year declines22
Peer rank#61 of 138#121 of 138

Split-adjusted annual distributions, 2020–2025. Research as of Sep 19, 2026. Yield and expense ratio above are current values, not part of this window.

AIQ Agreement Matrix

3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor KRE. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.

Evidence groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreKRE57 vs 69
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationKREValue 31 vs 65
TechnicalsIHIPrice vs 50-day 2.9% vs -0.1%; vs 200-day 1.9% vs 1.7%
Risk ResilienceKRERisk Resilience 70 vs 75
Analyst expectationsNot coveredNot covered

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of IHI and KRE and are excluded from the count.

AIQ Decision Stability

Stable

The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.

  • The AIQ gap is wide at 12 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
  • The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
  • The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)

Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on KRE.

How the comparison changed

120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28

KRE lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 9 to 12 points over 30 sessions.

Jun 29IHI leads above the line · KRE leads belowOct 28
Today
KRE +12
57 vs 69
7 sessions ago
KRE +11
57 vs 68
30 sessions ago
KRE +9
47 vs 56
90 sessions ago
KRE +8
50 vs 58

The lead has not changed hands in this window.

AIQ Signal Divergence

Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.

IHIConflicted

1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted

Only IHI

  • Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (1.06%)
  • RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
KRE

4 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral

Only KRE

  • Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (1.60%)
  • EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
  • Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon

Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, MACD Bullish Crossover.

IHI is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.

Price vs model alignment

Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.

IHINo material change

Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.98%, AIQ 0 points).

KREConfirmed weakness

Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -1.17%, AIQ -2 points).

What would flip this result

A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.

  1. 1IHI closes the Value gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to KRE's edge.
  2. 2IHI's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
  3. 3KRE's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
  4. 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.

The full evidence

Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.

Performance

IHI leads 4 of 6 windows
MetricIHIKRE
1 week (5 sessions)2.3%2.1%
1 month (20 sessions)6.8%3.8%
3 months (63 sessions)3.6%-5%
6 months (126 sessions)4.5%4.5%
Year to date-12.1%11.3%
1 year (252 sessions)-11.7%17.8%

Technicals

IHI has the stronger structure
MetricIHIKRE
RSI (14)75.365.6
ADX (14)24.824.8
Price vs 50-day2.9%-0.1%
Price vs 200-day1.9%1.7%
Volatility (1M, annualized)19.7%17.3%

Risk

KRE is the more resilient
MetricIHIKRE
Beta0.40.59
Sharpe ratio-0.70.74
Sortino ratio-1.111.12
Max drawdown-26.2%-14.9%
Current drawdown-15.3%-7.5%
Annualized volatility20.5%20.4%
Value at risk (95%)-2.1%-1.8%

Straight answers

Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.

What is the difference between IHI and KRE?

KRE holds 160 positions to IHI's 49, and 0% of their weight is in the same securities.

How much do IHI and KRE overlap?

IHI and KRE share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings. 46 holdings are unique to IHI, and 158 holdings are unique to KRE. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

Which ETF is more diversified, IHI or KRE?

KRE holds more positions: 160 versus 49 for IHI.

Which has the lower expense ratio?

KRE has the lower expense ratio, 0.35% a year against 0.37% for IHI.

Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?

KRE, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 2.24% against 0.48% for IHI.

Which ETF has been more volatile?

Their volatility over the past year is similar: 20.5% annualized for IHI and 20.4% for KRE.

Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?

IHI fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -32.4% against -52.7% for KRE.

Compare IHI and KRE with others

Continue your research

This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.

How this comparison is scored

The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.

The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.

How to use side-by-side comparison →

This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.