EAPCX vs. FMAT

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

EAPCX (Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A) and FMAT (Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF) are both funds - EAPCX is a Commodities fund managed by Eaton Vance, while FMAT is a Materials fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Materials Index. Over the past 10 years, EAPCX returned 10.79%/yr vs 10.36%/yr for FMAT. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EAPCX charges 0.91%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for FMAT.

Performance

EAPCX vs. FMAT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A (EAPCX) and Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EAPCX achieves a 21.68% return, which is significantly higher than FMAT's 13.39% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with EAPCX having a 10.79% annualized return and FMAT not far behind at 10.36%.

EAPCX

• 1D: 0.76%
• 1M: -0.87%
• YTD: 21.68%
• 6M: 24.42%
• 1Y: 41.33%
• 3Y*: 18.17%
• 5Y*: 14.18%
• 10Y*: 10.79%

FMAT

• 1D: 1.33%
• 1M: 1.16%
• YTD: 13.39%
• 6M: 17.38%
• 1Y: 24.26%
• 3Y*: 12.50%
• 5Y*: 5.92%
• 10Y*: 10.36%

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

EAPCX vs. FMAT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
EAPCX Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A	21.68%	22.06%	9.63%	-4.87%	17.26%	29.92%	7.77%	9.19%	-9.60%	6.71%
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	13.39%	12.11%	0.47%	13.71%	-11.54%	27.45%	19.57%	23.35%	-17.40%	23.51%

Correlation

The correlation between EAPCX and FMAT is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.19
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.25
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.33
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.35
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2013	0.35

The correlation between EAPCX and FMAT shifts across timeframes, from 0.19 (1 year) to 0.35 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

EAPCX vs. FMAT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

EAPCX

EAPCX Risk / Return Rank: 90
EAPCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
EAPCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
EAPCX Omega Ratio Rank: 83
EAPCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
EAPCX Martin Ratio Rank: 94

FMAT

FMAT Risk / Return Rank: 37
FMAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
FMAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
FMAT Omega Ratio Rank: 35
FMAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
FMAT Martin Ratio Rank: 38

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

EAPCX vs. FMAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A (EAPCX) and Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT). 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.

	EAPCX	FMAT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.15	1.38	+1.77
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.99	1.97	+2.01
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.56	1.24	+0.32
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.91	1.84	+4.07
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	21.29	6.07	+15.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EAPCX vs. FMAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EAPCX Sharpe Ratio is 3.15, which is higher than the FMAT Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EAPCX and FMAT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EAPCX	FMAT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.15	1.38	+1.77
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.97	0.30	+0.67
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.82	0.49	+0.33
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.30	0.45	-0.14

Drawdowns

EAPCX vs. FMAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EAPCX drawdown since its inception was -52.59%, which is greater than FMAT's maximum drawdown of -41.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EAPCX and FMAT.

Drawdown Indicators

	EAPCX	FMAT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-52.59%	-41.11%	-11.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.22%	-13.48%	+6.26%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-10.57%	-23.17%	+12.60%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.05%	-25.40%	+7.35%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-28.81%	-41.11%	+12.30%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.44%	-3.68%	-0.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-22.77%	-6.87%	-15.90%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.00%	4.09%	-2.09%

Volatility

EAPCX vs. FMAT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A (EAPCX) is 4.15%, while Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) has a volatility of 6.35%. This indicates that EAPCX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FMAT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EAPCX	FMAT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.15%	6.35%	-2.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.72%	13.95%	-2.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.92%	17.66%	-3.74%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.64%	19.60%	-4.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.26%	21.20%	-7.94%

EAPCX vs. FMAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

EAPCX has a 0.91% expense ratio, which is higher than FMAT's 0.08% expense ratio.

Dividends

EAPCX vs. FMAT - Dividend Comparison

EAPCX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.87%, more than FMAT's 1.41% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EAPCX Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A	10.87%	13.23%	5.46%	3.43%	14.80%	13.74%	3.01%	1.11%	0.41%	4.98%	6.49%	0.00%
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	1.41%	1.64%	1.68%	1.71%	2.00%	1.44%	1.73%	1.89%	2.18%	1.53%	1.78%	2.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EAPCX and FMAT in my portfolio?

EAPCX and FMAT have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EAPCX or FMAT?

FMAT has higher volatility (6.35%) compared to EAPCX (4.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EAPCX dropped -52.59% vs FMAT's -41.11%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EAPCX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.15 vs 1.38), 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.