IHI vs XLK ETF Comparison
Compare IHI and XLK across fund costs, diversification, holdings, performance, income, risk and current AlgovestIQ evidence.
What is the main difference between IHI and XLK?
IHI is iShares U.S. Medical Devices ETF, while XLK is State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has XLK ahead on AIQ Score, 56 versus 48.
| Metric | IHI | XLK | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1Y return | -12.5% | +43.3% | Performance |
| YTD return | -13.7% | +30.1% | Performance |
| AIQ Score | 48/100 | 56/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| AIQ Edge Score | 3/10 | 6/10 | AlgovestIQ |
| Momentum | 46/100 | 57/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| Risk Resilience | 69/100 | 61/100 | AlgovestIQ |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
iShares U.S. Medical Devices ETF vs State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF
XLK leads
XLK leads by 8 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum.
Competitive: 3 of 4 evidence groups support XLK.
iShares U.S. Medical Devices ETF
State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors XLK over IHI, 56 versus 48 as of Sep 6, 2026. XLK's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum, while IHI holds the stronger risk resilience profile. XLK also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor XLK today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability.
Compare iShares U.S. Medical Devices ETF and State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
Performance over time
Price-return comparison for both ETFs using available daily close history.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000
Based on available close-price history. Distribution reinvestment is not added unless already reflected in the source series.
Compare IHI and XLK against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
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.
- Quality30%58 vs 74XLK +16
- Momentum25%46 vs 57XLK +11
- Risk Resilience15%69 vs 61IHI +8
- Value30%30 vs 36XLK +6
3 of 4 evidence groups favor XLK. XLK’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum; IHI keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
The central trade-off
XLK (State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and momentum.
IHI (iShares U.S. Medical Devices ETF): the counter-case, on risk resilience.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
XLKXLK on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
XLKXLK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 points.
Momentum
XLKXLK on the Momentum factor, by 11 points.
Lower downside
IHIIHI on Risk Resilience, by 8 points.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
ETF comparison questions
Short answers to the fund-specific questions behind this comparison.
Which ETF is more diversified, IHI or XLK?
Use holdings count, top-10 concentration and sector exposure together; the current dataset does not show a decisive holdings-count edge.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
The current fund profile does not show a lower-cost winner.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
The current dataset does not show a higher-yield winner.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
The current risk snapshot does not show a volatility difference.
Which ETF has the stronger current AlgovestIQ evidence?
XLK currently leads on supporting AlgovestIQ evidence, 56 to 48.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor XLK. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | XLK | 48 vs 56 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | XLK | Value 30 vs 36 |
| Technicals | XLK | Price vs 50-day 1.1% vs 2.6%; vs 200-day -3.5% vs 16.8% |
| Risk Resilience | IHI | Risk Resilience 69 vs 61 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of IHI and XLK and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 8 points.
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 XLK.
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.
- 1IHI closes the Quality gap — currently 16 points behind, the largest single contributor to XLK's edge.
- 2IHI generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3XLK starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, 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
XLK leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | IHI | XLK |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -2.8% | 0.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.4% | -0.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 7.1% | 3.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -5.5% | 36.4% |
| Year to date | -13.7% | 30.1% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -12.5% | 43.3% |
Technicals
XLK has the stronger structure| Metric | IHI | XLK |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 40.2 | 44.9 |
| ADX (14) | 18.1 | 11.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.1% | 2.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -3.5% | 16.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 18% | 20.9% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, IHI or XLK?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, XLK is the stronger of the two as of Sep 6, 2026, scoring 56 against IHI's 48. The edge comes from quality and momentum. IHI is not without a case — it holds the better risk resilience profile, which matters more if that is the objective you are optimizing for. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is IHI or XLK the better buy right now?
XLK carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 6, 2026, and the comparison is rated Competitive — 3 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. A Competitive rating means the two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
Why does the AIQ Score favor XLK over IHI?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. XLK leads Quality by 16 points; XLK leads Momentum by 11 points; IHI leads Risk Resilience by 8 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which is better value, IHI or XLK?
XLK is the better-valued of the two on the peer-relative Value factor. XLK on the peer-relative Value factor, by 6 points. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, IHI or XLK?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, IHI or XLK?
XLK on the Momentum factor, by 11 points. Momentum carries 25% of the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, IHI or XLK?
IHI is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. IHI on Risk Resilience, by 8 points. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is IHI more profitable than XLK?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
What would change the IHI vs XLK verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: IHI closes the Quality gap — currently 16 points behind, the largest single contributor to XLK's edge; IHI generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as Golden Cross Active or MACD Bullish Crossover; XLK starts generating bearish momentum or trend signals; a regime shift changes factor weighting — the composite weights Quality and Value at 30% each, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
Compare IHI and XLK with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.