ARKG
Not rated
No published distribution safety rating is available.
ETF Comparison
ARKG vs XBI: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?
A head-to-head comparison of ARK Genomic Revolution ETF and SPDR S&P Biotech ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.
Updated November 6, 2026
How these figures are calculated: methodology.
Best for
- ARKGInvestors who want targeted health-care exposure and accept its concentration.
- XBIInvestors who want higher current income (0.36% paid over the past 12 months while ARKG makes no distribution).
Price and total return
Compare the same available dates. Add a ticker or benchmark below; these controls change the chart only. The snapshot and article describe the original comparison.
Interactive history loads here. The snapshot and period returns remain available when chart history cannot be loaded.
Distribution Safety Score
An estimate of distribution reliability, not price or principal safety, a probability, or a guarantee. Score methodology.
XBI
Generally safe
Limited data
Score snapshot as of . Method 1.11.
Side-by-side snapshot
| Metric |  ARKG |  XBI |
|---|---|---|
| Full name | ARK Genomic Revolution ETF | SPDR S&P Biotech ETF |
| Issuer | ARK Invest | State Street |
| Last Close | $45.45 as of November 6, 2026 | $152.21 as of November 6, 2026 |
| Distribution rate | — | 0.07% |
| Trailing 12-month yield | — | 0.36% |
| Distribution Safety Score™ | — | 72 |
| Safety-Adjusted Yield | — | 0.05% |
| Expense ratio | 0.75% | 0.35% |
| AUM | $2.15B | $10.6B |
| Distribution frequency | None | Quarterly |
| Underlying index | Actively managed (no tracked index recorded) | S&P Biotechnology Select Industry Index |
| Objective | Actively managed ETF focused on companies in genomics, gene editing, CRISPR, and molecular diagnostics. | Tracks the S&P Biotechnology Select Industry Index using equal-weight methodology. |
| Asset class | Equity | Equity |
| Inception date | 10/31/2014 | 01/31/2006 |
| Beta | 2.21 | 1.01 |
| Last dividend | — | $0.138 |
| Ex-dividend date | 12/29/2021 | 09/21/2026 |
Total returns
100% reinvested · ex-date convention. Period returns use this fixed assumption, independent of chart settings. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year.
ARKG has outpaced XBI over the trailing twelve months, posting a 50.03% total return against 36.47%. The lead holds up over 10 years too: ARKG has compounded at 11.75% a year, against 10.61% for XBI. XBI has been the steadier holding, though — annualized volatility of 28.3% against 45.2% for ARKG. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.
| Symbol | YTD cumulative | 1Y cumulative | 3Y annualized | 5Y annualized | 10Y annualized | Since Oct 2014 | Volatility | Sharpe | Sortino | Max drawdown |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARKG | 54.02% | 50.03% | 19.62% | -10.45% | 11.75% | 7.55% | 45.2% | 0.31 | 0.45 | -46.5% |
| XBI | 21.83% | 36.47% | 27.79% | 2.61% | 10.61% | 8.49% | 28.3% | 0.73 | 1.04 | -33.0% |
Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date (a modeling convention, not the cash-settlement date), split-adjusted, as of November 5, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year. “Since Oct 2014” measures every fund from October 31, 2014 — the start of shared available history — so all funds share one comparison window. Volatility is the annualized standard deviation of daily total returns over the trailing 3 years. Sharpe and Sortino divide the annualized return in excess of the risk-free rate by, respectively, that volatility and the downside deviation (both over the trailing 3 years) — higher is better. Max drawdown is the largest peak-to-trough total-return decline over the same window — shallower is better.
Not a distribution payer
ARKG (ARK Genomic Revolution ETF) has no distribution rate on file and its distribution frequency is None. ARKG is not a payer. The blank yield is not a zero yield.
Visual comparison
Key metrics
Projected income on $10K
Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.
Bottom lineChoose ARKG if you want targeted health-care exposure and accept its concentration. Choose XBI if you want higher current income (0.36% paid over the past 12 months while ARKG makes no distribution).
Income calculator
See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.
ETFs14
Total AUM$15.5B
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
ARK Invest is known for actively managed ETFs focused on disruptive innovation and emerging technologies across digital assets and innovation themes. ARK's funds are characterized by concentrated portfolios of high-conviction stock picks and a research-driven approach to identifying companies positioned to benefit from technological transformation.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on ARKG.
ETFs186
Total AUM$2.15T
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Their 88-fund lineup spans diverse strategies including sector exposure (Select Sector SPDR), income generation (Income and Select Sector SPDR Premium Income families), commodities (including the widely-held GLD gold ETF), bonds, ESG-focused investments, and thematic allocations, with popular tickers like DIA (Diamonds Trust), FEZ (Eurozone exposure), and JNK (high-yield bonds) among their most recognized funds. The issuer is characterized by its comprehensive coverage across multiple market segments and its emphasis on both traditional index-based products and specialized strategies like covered call income funds and factor-based investing.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on XBI.
Quick verdict
ARKG (ARK Genomic Revolution ETF) and XBI (SPDR S&P Biotech ETF) are both ETFs, but they take different approaches.
XBI has paid a 0.36% yield over the past 12 months. ARKG has not yet established a full distribution history, so a comparable yield figure is not available.
XBI is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.35% compared to 0.75%.
XBI is the larger fund by assets ($10.6B), but assets alone do not establish trading costs or liquidity.
Top-holdings overlap
Positions that appear in every fund's top 10. Issuers disclose only the largest weights, so this captures the overlap of the concentrated end of each book — not the full portfolios.
1 shared position
ARKG 4.9% of its top-10 weight
XBI 1.7% of its top-10 weight
| Position | ARKG | XBI |
|---|---|---|
| NTRA Natera Inc |
Deep dive
Yield & income
On a $10,000 investment at the rates paid over the past 12 months, ARKG has no reported distribution yield yet, so a cash estimate is not available, while XBI would pay about $36.00 a year (about $9.00 per quarterly distribution on average).
ARKG yield—
XBI 12-month yield0.36%
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000, ARKG would cost approximately $750 in fees vs $350 for XBI (simplified, not compounded). The $400.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.
ARKG ER0.75%
XBI ER0.35%
Strategy & risk
ARKG is an actively managed ETF, while XBI tracks S&P Biotechnology Select Industry Index. Beta is 2.21 for ARKG and 1.01 for XBI, making XBI the less sensitive to market moves of the two by this measure.
ARKG beta2.21
XBI beta1.01
Fund details
ARKG is managed by ARK Invest (launched 10/31/2014) with $2.15B in assets. XBI is managed by State Street (launched 01/31/2006) with $10.6B in assets.
ARKG AUM$2.15B
XBI AUM$10.6B
Frequently asked questions
Which of ARKG or XBI pays more dividend income?
XBI currently reports a distribution yield, while ARKG has not yet established a full distribution history. A direct income comparison is not yet meaningful — check back once both funds have published several consecutive distributions.
What is the difference between ARKG and XBI?
ARKG (ARK Genomic Revolution ETF) is an actively managed ETF, while XBI (SPDR S&P Biotech ETF) tracks S&P Biotechnology Select Industry Index. They are issued by ARK Invest and State Street respectively.
Can I hold both ARKG and XBI?
Yes. Their disclosed top-10 holdings share only 1 position, so combining both adds mostly distinct underlying names — see the holdings-overlap section above. Overlap outside the disclosed top 10 can still exist.
Which has lower fees, ARKG or XBI?
ARKG has an expense ratio of 0.75% while XBI charges 0.35%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.
How much income does $10,000 in ARKG vs XBI generate?
At the rates paid over the past 12 months, ARKG does not pay distributions, so there is no cash income to estimate. $10,000 in XBI would pay about $36.00 a year (about $9.00 per quarterly distribution on average).
Which has performed better historically, ARKG or XBI?
ARKG has outpaced XBI over the trailing twelve months, posting a 50.03% total return against 36.47%. The lead holds up over 10 years too: ARKG has compounded at 11.75% a year, against 10.61% for XBI. XBI has been the steadier holding, though — annualized volatility of 28.3% against 45.2% for ARKG. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
More comparisons to explore
People also compare ARKG with
Popular comparisons
ARKG vs XBI — at a glance
Generated November 1, 2026.
Figures quoted in this analysis are from its generation date and may lag the live snapshot table above, which always shows the latest data.
Overview
ARKG and XBI both provide exposure to biotechnology and genomics companies, but they take fundamentally different approaches. ARKG is an actively managed ETF that concentrates on disruptive genomics, gene editing, and molecular diagnostics companies, while XBI tracks a broad, equal-weighted index of biotech firms across the sector. The key distinction is active stock-picking versus systematic index coverage—and the volatility that comes with each.
How they differ
ARKG's active strategy targets a narrower ecosystem of genomic innovators, which shows in its beta of 2.21 versus XBI's 1.09; ARKG's portfolio moves more than twice as sharply as the broad market in either direction. That concentration strategy explains the gap: ARKG charges 0.75% while XBI costs 0.35%, a 40-basis-point advantage for the indexed approach.
XBI's equal-weight methodology and broader mandate produce a materially different income profile.
Who each is best for
ARKG: Fits investors with higher risk tolerance who believe genomics and gene-editing innovation will outpace the broader biotech market and are comfortable with significant portfolio swings. Suits those with a multi-year horizon who can weather drawdowns and want concentrated exposure to disruptive-science themes without quarterly distributions complicating reinvestment timing.
XBI: Designed for investors seeking diversified biotech exposure with lower volatility and a modest but steady income stream. Matches those who prefer passive index tracking, lower fees, and more predictable price behavior—and who value quarterly distributions as a cash flow component.
Key risks to know
- Concentration and theme risk in ARKG: Active selection into genomics and gene editing creates sector and narrative concentration. If investors rotate away from biotech innovation themes or if key holdings underperform, ARKG's concentrated portfolio may decline faster than the broader biotech index.
- High beta and drawdown sensitivity: ARKG's beta of 2.21 means it amplifies market declines. A 20% drop in the S&P 500 would historically correspond to roughly a 44% decline in ARKG—a material tail-risk consideration for shorter time horizons or leveraged positions.
- XBI's equal-weight rebalancing drag: Equal weighting forces regular selling of winners and buying of laggards. In a prolonged bull market for mega-cap biotech names, this mechanical rebalancing can lag a market-cap-weighted approach.
- Sector concentration in both: Both funds carry biotech-sector risk. Regulatory headwinds (FDA approvals, pricing pressure, patent cliffs) or broad healthcare drawdowns affect the entire basket, offering little shelter across asset classes.
Bottom line
If you prioritize upside participation in genomic innovation and can tolerate sharp swings, ARKG's active, concentrated bet offers a different risk-return profile than XBI's broader, steadier index approach. If you want lower volatility, index-based diversification, and quarterly income with cheaper fees, XBI aligns differently. Past performance does not predict future results, and both funds carry significant biotech sector risk.
AI-generated analysis for educational purposes only. Verify important details independently; past performance does not guarantee future results.
Learn the method
The metrics behind this comparison, explained in the Academy.
These comparisons follow the Dividend Vision methodology.