PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AUSF vs. FELG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AUSF vs. FELG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF (AUSF) and Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AUSF achieves a 12.60% return, which is significantly higher than FELG's 2.21% return.


AUSF

1D
-0.21%
1M
3.29%
6M
7.58%
YTD
12.60%
1Y
20.12%
3Y*
19.13%
5Y*
14.47%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
12.70%

FELG

1D
0.93%
1M
-1.07%
6M
4.01%
YTD
2.21%
1Y
14.20%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
22.07%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$2.36M$2.26M$3.95M
$14.80M$13.72M$19.44M

AUSF vs. FELG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
AUSF
Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF
12.60%13.69%16.05%9.15%
FELG
Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF
2.21%18.44%35.45%4.37%

Correlation

The correlation between AUSF and FELG is 0.09, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.09

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 2023

0.30

Over the past year, the correlation between AUSF and FELG has dropped to 0.09 - well below their long-term average of 0.30, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

AUSF vs. FELG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
AUSF
FELG

Financial Services

20.1%
4.6%

Technology

15.7%
55.9%

Industrials

13.4%
8.4%

Healthcare

12.3%
5.7%

Consumer Cyclical

8.8%
8.6%

Consumer Defensive

7.9%
1.2%

Communication Services

6.6%
14.7%

Utilities

4.5%
1.2%

Real Estate

4.3%
0.1%

Energy

3.3%
0.7%

Basic Materials

2.5%
0.1%

Financial Services

AUSF
20.1%
FELG
4.6%

Technology

AUSF
15.7%
FELG
55.9%

Industrials

AUSF
13.4%
FELG
8.4%

Healthcare

AUSF
12.3%
FELG
5.7%

Consumer Cyclical

AUSF
8.8%
FELG
8.6%

Consumer Defensive

AUSF
7.9%
FELG
1.2%

Communication Services

AUSF
6.6%
FELG
14.7%

Utilities

AUSF
4.5%
FELG
1.2%

Real Estate

AUSF
4.3%
FELG
0.1%

Energy

AUSF
3.3%
FELG
0.7%

Basic Materials

AUSF
2.5%
FELG
0.1%

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

AUSF vs. FELG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

AUSF
AUSF Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
AUSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AUSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
AUSF Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
AUSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
AUSF Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
Martin Ratio Rank

FELG
FELG Risk / Return Rank: 2727
Overall Rank
FELG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2929
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FELG Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
FELG Omega Ratio Rank: 2727
Omega Ratio Rank
FELG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
FELG Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

AUSF vs. FELG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF (AUSF) and Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


AUSFFELGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.15

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.63

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.13

+0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.27

0.73

+2.54

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.56

2.27

+7.29

AUSF vs. FELG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AUSF Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is higher than the FELG Sharpe Ratio of 0.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AUSF and FELG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

AUSF vs. FELG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AUSF drawdown since its inception was -44.25%, which is greater than FELG's maximum drawdown of -23.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUSF and FELG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AUSFFELGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.25%

-23.89%

-20.36%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.84%

-16.17%

+10.33%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.29%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.23%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.62%

-6.36%

+4.74%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.16%

-3.62%

-0.54%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.99%

5.19%

-3.20%

Volatility

AUSF vs. FELG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF (AUSF) is 3.73%, while Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG) has a volatility of 6.11%. This indicates that AUSF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FELG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AUSFFELGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.73%

6.11%

-2.38%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.46%

13.74%

-6.28%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.46%

17.29%

-6.83%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.62%

20.02%

-6.40%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.96%

20.02%

-1.06%

AUSF vs. FELG - Expense Ratio Comparison

AUSF has a 0.27% expense ratio, which is higher than FELG's 0.18% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

AUSF vs. FELG - Dividend Comparison

AUSF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.61%, more than FELG's 0.36% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
AUSF
Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF
2.61%2.78%2.63%1.83%2.51%2.22%2.95%4.02%1.46%
FELG
Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF
0.36%0.38%0.44%0.11%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


AUSF and FELG have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FELG has higher volatility (6.11%) compared to AUSF (3.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AUSF dropped -44.25% vs FELG's -23.89%.

On 1-year performance, AUSF leads with 20.12% vs 14.20% for FELG. On fees, FELG is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, AUSF has been the lower-risk option at 3.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, AUSF has performed better with a 20.12% return vs 14.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FELG is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.27% for AUSF.

AUSF has the higher dividend yield at 2.61%, compared with 0.36% for FELG.

AUSF is categorized as Mid Cap Value Equities, while FELG is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.27% for AUSF and 0.18% for FELG.

AUSF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.83 vs 0.68), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AUSF and FELG

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