ACSI vs. FITZ
ACSI (American Customer Satisfaction ETF) and FITZ (Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. ACSI is passively managed, while FITZ is actively managed. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ACSI charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for FITZ.
Performance
ACSI vs. FITZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
ACSI
- 1D
- 1.04%
- 1M
- 6.00%
- YTD
- 10.79%
- 6M
- 11.03%
- 1Y
- 20.22%
- 3Y*
- 18.90%
- 5Y*
- 9.35%
- 10Y*
- —
FITZ
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ACSI vs. FITZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
ACSI American Customer Satisfaction ETF | 0.97% |
FITZ Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF | -1.66% |
Correlation
The correlation between ACSI and FITZ is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 29, 2026 | 0.40 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
ACSI vs. FITZ — Risk / Return Rank
ACSI
FITZ
ACSI vs. FITZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Customer Satisfaction ETF (ACSI) and Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF (FITZ). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
| ACSI | FITZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.62 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.22 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ACSI | FITZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.75 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.56 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.76 | -7.29 | +8.05 |
Drawdowns
ACSI vs. FITZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ACSI drawdown since its inception was -34.49%, which is greater than FITZ's maximum drawdown of -1.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACSI and FITZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ACSI | FITZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.49% | -1.97% | -32.52% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.76% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.27% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.86% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.37% | -1.97% | +0.60% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.39% | -1.08% | -4.31% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.99% | — | — |
Volatility
ACSI vs. FITZ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ACSI | FITZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.22% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.93% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.60% | 8.74% | +2.86% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.67% | 8.74% | +7.93% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.43% | 8.74% | +8.69% |
ACSI vs. FITZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
ACSI has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is lower than FITZ's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
ACSI vs. FITZ - Dividend Comparison
ACSI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.82%, while FITZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACSI American Customer Satisfaction ETF | 0.82% | 0.91% | 0.69% | 1.01% | 0.81% | 0.31% | 0.82% | 1.64% | 1.59% | 1.20% | 0.18% |
FITZ Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ACSI and FITZ have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ACSI is cheaper at 0.66% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ACSI is cheaper with a 0.66% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for FITZ.
ACSI has the higher dividend yield at 0.82%, compared with 0.00% for FITZ.
They also come from different issuers: Exponential ETFs and Nicholas. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for ACSI and 0.75% for FITZ.
Find the right allocation for ACSI and FITZ
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer