AUSF vs. FSMD
AUSF (Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF) and FSMD (Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AUSF is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Adaptive Wealth Strategies U.S. Factor Index, while FSMD is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AUSF returned 13.35%/yr vs 10.00%/yr for FSMD. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. AUSF charges 0.27%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for FSMD.
Performance
AUSF vs. FSMD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AUSF achieves a 9.27% return, which is significantly lower than FSMD's 17.58% return.
AUSF
- 1D
- 0.70%
- 1M
- 2.94%
- YTD
- 9.27%
- 6M
- 8.68%
- 1Y
- 17.75%
- 3Y*
- 19.94%
- 5Y*
- 13.35%
- 10Y*
- —
FSMD
- 1D
- 1.00%
- 1M
- 4.34%
- YTD
- 17.58%
- 6M
- 15.58%
- 1Y
- 29.65%
- 3Y*
- 17.46%
- 5Y*
- 10.00%
- 10Y*
- —
AUSF vs. FSMD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AUSF Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF | 9.27% | 13.69% | 16.05% | 22.26% | -0.18% | 27.48% | 1.27% | 12.21% |
FSMD Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF | 17.58% | 8.70% | 15.18% | 17.37% | -11.15% | 26.40% | 8.94% | 8.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between AUSF and FSMD is 0.72, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.72 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2019 | 0.84 |
The correlation between AUSF and FSMD shifts across timeframes, from 0.72 (1 year) to 0.84 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
AUSF vs. FSMD - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
AUSF
FSMD
Financial Services
Technology
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Utilities
Energy
Basic Materials
Financial Services
AUSF
FSMD
Technology
AUSF
FSMD
Industrials
AUSF
FSMD
Healthcare
AUSF
FSMD
Consumer Cyclical
AUSF
FSMD
Communication Services
AUSF
FSMD
Consumer Defensive
AUSF
FSMD
Real Estate
AUSF
FSMD
Utilities
AUSF
FSMD
Energy
AUSF
FSMD
Basic Materials
AUSF
FSMD
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. FSMD — Risk / Return Rank
AUSF
FSMD
AUSF vs. FSMD - 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 Small-Mid Multifactor ETF (FSMD). 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.
| AUSF | FSMD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.13 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.20 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.31 | -0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.86 | 3.30 | -0.44 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.29 | 11.89 | -3.60 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AUSF vs. FSMD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AUSF drawdown since its inception was -44.25%, which is greater than FSMD's maximum drawdown of -40.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUSF and FSMD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AUSF | FSMD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -44.25% | -40.67% | -3.58% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.84% | -8.44% | +2.60% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.29% | -22.16% | +9.87% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -14.23% | -22.16% | +7.93% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.21% | -5.98% | +1.77% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.02% | 2.34% | -0.32% |
Volatility
AUSF vs. FSMD - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF (AUSF) is 2.70%, while Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF (FSMD) has a volatility of 5.14%. This indicates that AUSF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FSMD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AUSF | FSMD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.70% | 5.14% | -2.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.72% | 11.85% | -5.13% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.14% | 15.69% | -5.55% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.66% | 18.55% | -4.89% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.04% | 21.43% | -2.39% |
AUSF vs. FSMD - Expense Ratio Comparison
AUSF has a 0.27% expense ratio, which is lower than FSMD's 0.29% expense ratio.
Dividends
AUSF vs. FSMD - Dividend Comparison
AUSF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.69%, more than FSMD's 1.18% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AUSF Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF | 2.69% | 2.78% | 2.63% | 1.83% | 2.51% | 2.22% | 2.95% | 4.02% | 1.46% |
FSMD Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF | 1.18% | 1.33% | 1.29% | 1.37% | 1.54% | 1.18% | 1.32% | 1.37% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AUSF and FSMD have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FSMD has higher volatility (5.14%) compared to AUSF (2.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AUSF dropped -44.25% vs FSMD's -40.67%.
On 5-year performance, AUSF leads with 13.35% vs 10.00% for FSMD. On fees, AUSF is cheaper at 0.27% per year. On volatility, AUSF has been the lower-risk option at 2.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, AUSF has performed better with a 13.35% return vs 10.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
AUSF is cheaper with a 0.27% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for FSMD.
AUSF has the higher dividend yield at 2.69%, compared with 1.18% for FSMD.
AUSF is categorized as Mid Cap Value Equities, while FSMD is Small Cap Growth Equities. AUSF tracks Adaptive Wealth Strategies U.S. Factor Index, while FSMD tracks Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.27% for AUSF and 0.29% for FSMD.
FSMD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.78 vs 1.65), 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.
Find the right allocation for AUSF and FSMD
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