CZA vs. FMDE

Last updated Aug 6, 2026

CZA (Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF) and FMDE (Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap Core ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. CZA is passively managed, while FMDE is actively managed. Over the past year, CZA returned 21.50% vs 22.12% for FMDE. Their correlation of 0.85 means they have usually moved in the same direction. CZA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.23%/yr for FMDE.

Performance

CZA vs. FMDE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) and Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap Core ETF (FMDE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CZA achieves a 14.76% return, which is significantly lower than FMDE's 16.12% return.

CZA

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: 2.68%
• 6M: 9.29%
• YTD: 14.76%
• 1Y: 21.50%
• 3Y*: 13.99%
• 5Y*: 8.02%
• 10Y*: 10.72%
• ALL TIME*: 9.84%

FMDE

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: 3.47%
• 6M: 14.24%
• YTD: 16.12%
• 1Y: 22.12%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 22.45%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CZA Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF	$183.67K	$205.00K	$279.55K
FMDE Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap Core ETF	$40.89M	$39.76M	$36.46M

CZA vs. FMDE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CZA Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF	14.76%	8.31%	12.14%	9.19%
FMDE Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap Core ETF	16.12%	12.19%	21.76%	9.09%

Correlation

The correlation between CZA and FMDE is 0.80, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 2023	0.85

The correlation between CZA and FMDE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

CZA vs. FMDE - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CZA	FMDE
Financial Services	23.8%	11.9%
Industrials	16.2%	17.1%
Healthcare	13.9%	10.1%
Utilities	10.3%	4.7%
Technology	10.3%	20.2%
Real Estate	10.0%	5.7%
Consumer Cyclical	7.7%	10.6%
Basic Materials	4.0%	5.0%
Consumer Defensive	3.1%	2.1%
Energy	0.7%	5.0%
Communication Services	-	2.2%

Return for Risk

CZA vs. FMDE — Risk / Return Rank

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

CZA

CZA Risk / Return Rank: 64
CZA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
CZA Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
CZA Omega Ratio Rank: 63
CZA Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
CZA Martin Ratio Rank: 67

FMDE

FMDE Risk / Return Rank: 63
FMDE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
FMDE Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
FMDE Omega Ratio Rank: 56
FMDE Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
FMDE Martin Ratio Rank: 74

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.

CZA vs. FMDE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) and Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap Core ETF (FMDE). 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.

	CZA	FMDE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.73	1.62	+0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.58	2.33	+0.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.28	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.34	2.67	-0.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.27	10.56	-1.29

CZA vs. FMDE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CZA Sharpe Ratio is 1.73, which is comparable to the FMDE Sharpe Ratio of 1.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CZA and FMDE, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CZA vs. FMDE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CZA drawdown since its inception was -53.20%, which is greater than FMDE's maximum drawdown of -21.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CZA and FMDE.

Drawdown Indicators

	CZA	FMDE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.20%	-21.10%	-32.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.21%	-8.33%	-0.88%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.92%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.92%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.18%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.11%	-0.38%	+0.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.83%	-2.51%	-4.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.33%	2.10%	+0.23%

Volatility

CZA vs. FMDE - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) has a higher volatility of 3.20% compared to Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap Core ETF (FMDE) at 2.87%. This indicates that CZA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FMDE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CZA	FMDE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.20%	2.87%	+0.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.20%	10.30%	-1.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.46%	13.70%	-1.24%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.08%	15.93%	+0.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.20%	15.93%	+3.27%

CZA vs. FMDE - Expense Ratio Comparison

CZA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than FMDE's 0.23% expense ratio.

Dividends

CZA vs. FMDE - Dividend Comparison

CZA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.36%, more than FMDE's 1.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CZA Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF	1.36%	1.56%	1.27%	1.36%	1.71%	0.89%	1.42%	1.40%	1.27%	1.10%	1.87%	1.37%
FMDE Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap Core ETF	1.04%	1.23%	1.11%	0.10%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CZA and FMDE in my portfolio?

CZA and FMDE have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CZA or FMDE?

CZA has higher volatility (3.20%) compared to FMDE (2.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CZA dropped -53.20% vs FMDE's -21.10%.

Which ETF is better, CZA or FMDE?

On 1-year performance, FMDE leads with 22.12% vs 21.50% for CZA. On fees, FMDE is cheaper at 0.23% per year. On volatility, FMDE has been the lower-risk option at 2.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CZA or FMDE?

Over the 1-year period, FMDE has performed better with a 22.12% return vs 21.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CZA or FMDE?

FMDE is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CZA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CZA or FMDE?

CZA has the higher dividend yield at 1.36%, compared with 1.04% for FMDE.

What is the main difference between CZA and FMDE?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CZA and 0.23% for FMDE.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CZA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 vs 1.62), 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.