ANEW vs. FITZ
ANEW (ProShares MSCI Transformational Changes ETF) and FITZ (Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. ANEW is passively managed, while FITZ is actively managed. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ANEW charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for FITZ.
Performance
ANEW vs. FITZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
ANEW
- 1D
- 0.63%
- 1M
- 4.83%
- YTD
- 2.56%
- 6M
- 1.24%
- 1Y
- 5.77%
- 3Y*
- 14.01%
- 5Y*
- 3.96%
- 10Y*
- —
FITZ
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ANEW vs. FITZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
ANEW ProShares MSCI Transformational Changes ETF | 0.09% |
FITZ Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF | -1.66% |
Correlation
The correlation between ANEW and FITZ is 0.20, 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 | 0.20 |
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
ANEW vs. FITZ — Risk / Return Rank
ANEW
FITZ
ANEW vs. FITZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares MSCI Transformational Changes ETF (ANEW) 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.
| ANEW | FITZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.08 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.36 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.03 | — | — |
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
| ANEW | FITZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.44 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.21 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.29 | -7.29 | +7.58 |
Drawdowns
ANEW vs. FITZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ANEW drawdown since its inception was -39.87%, which is greater than FITZ's maximum drawdown of -1.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ANEW and FITZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ANEW | FITZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -39.87% | -1.97% | -37.90% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.12% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.26% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -39.87% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.44% | -1.97% | -0.47% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.36% | -1.08% | -12.28% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.62% | — | — |
Volatility
ANEW vs. FITZ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ANEW | FITZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.07% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.85% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.20% | 8.74% | +4.46% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.81% | 8.74% | +10.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.79% | 8.74% | +10.05% |
ANEW vs. FITZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
ANEW has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than FITZ's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
ANEW vs. FITZ - Dividend Comparison
ANEW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.61%, while FITZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ANEW ProShares MSCI Transformational Changes ETF | 0.61% | 0.54% | 1.08% | 0.87% | 1.05% | 0.24% | 0.04% |
FITZ Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ANEW and FITZ have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ANEW is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ANEW is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for FITZ.
ANEW has the higher dividend yield at 0.61%, compared with 0.00% for FITZ.
They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Nicholas. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for ANEW and 0.75% for FITZ.
Find the right allocation for ANEW 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