EART vs. FMAT

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EART (Global X Rare Earth & Critical Materials ETF) and FMAT (Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EART is a Rare Earth & Strategic Metals fund tracking the Solactive Rare Earth & Critical Materials Index, while FMAT is a Materials fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Materials Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, EART returned 19.97%/yr vs 11.22%/yr for FMAT. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EART charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for FMAT.

Performance

EART vs. FMAT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Rare Earth & Critical Materials ETF (EART) 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, EART achieves a 8.19% return, which is significantly lower than FMAT's 11.09% return.

EART

• 1D: -5.19%
• 1M: -5.99%
• YTD: 8.19%
• 6M: 8.04%
• 1Y: 90.35%
• 3Y*: 19.97%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FMAT

• 1D: -1.81%
• 1M: 0.83%
• YTD: 11.09%
• 6M: 9.58%
• 1Y: 20.54%
• 3Y*: 11.22%
• 5Y*: 6.71%
• 10Y*: 10.45%

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

EART vs. FMAT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
EART Global X Rare Earth & Critical Materials ETF	8.19%	98.48%	-7.19%	-19.75%	-17.92%
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	11.09%	12.11%	0.47%	13.71%	-3.86%

Correlation

The correlation between EART and FMAT is 0.65, 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	0.65
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2022	0.64

The correlation between EART and FMAT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

EART vs. FMAT — Risk / Return Rank

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

EART

EART Risk / Return Rank: 66
EART Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
EART Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
EART Omega Ratio Rank: 62
EART Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
EART Martin Ratio Rank: 60

FMAT

FMAT Risk / Return Rank: 32
FMAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
FMAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
FMAT Omega Ratio Rank: 30
FMAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
FMAT Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

EART vs. FMAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Rare Earth & Critical Materials ETF (EART) 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.

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.

	EART	FMAT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.30	1.12	+1.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.62	1.65	+0.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.20	+0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.49	1.53	+1.96
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.10	4.86	+5.24

EART vs. FMAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EART Sharpe Ratio is 2.30, which is higher than the FMAT Sharpe Ratio of 1.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EART 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.

Drawdowns

EART vs. FMAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EART drawdown since its inception was -53.68%, which is greater than FMAT's maximum drawdown of -41.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EART and FMAT.

Drawdown Indicators

	EART	FMAT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.68%	-41.11%	-12.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-26.03%	-13.48%	-12.55%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-37.20%	-23.17%	-14.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-25.40%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-41.11%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-18.05%	-5.63%	-12.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-28.98%	-6.87%	-22.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.98%	4.24%	+4.74%

Volatility

EART vs. FMAT - Volatility Comparison

Global X Rare Earth & Critical Materials ETF (EART) has a higher volatility of 13.28% compared to Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) at 6.66%. This indicates that EART's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FMAT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EART	FMAT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.28%	6.66%	+6.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	33.46%	14.85%	+18.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	39.51%	18.48%	+21.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.26%	19.69%	+14.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.26%	21.22%	+13.04%

EART vs. FMAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

EART has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than FMAT's 0.08% expense ratio.

Dividends

EART vs. FMAT - Dividend Comparison

EART's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.60%, less than FMAT's 1.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EART Global X Rare Earth & Critical Materials ETF	0.60%	0.65%	1.06%	1.83%	2.04%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	1.43%	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 EART and FMAT in my portfolio?

EART and FMAT have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EART or FMAT?

EART has higher volatility (13.28%) compared to FMAT (6.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EART dropped -53.68% vs FMAT's -41.11%.

Which ETF is better, EART or FMAT?

On 3-year performance, EART leads with 19.97% vs 11.22% for FMAT. On fees, FMAT is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, FMAT has been the lower-risk option at 6.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EART or FMAT?

Over the 3-year period, EART has performed better with a 19.97% return vs 11.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EART or FMAT?

FMAT is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for EART.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EART or FMAT?

FMAT has the higher dividend yield at 1.43%, compared with 0.60% for EART.

What is the main difference between EART and FMAT?

EART is categorized as Rare Earth & Strategic Metals, while FMAT is Materials. EART tracks Solactive Rare Earth & Critical Materials Index, while FMAT tracks MSCI USA IMI Materials Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for EART and 0.08% for FMAT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EART currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 1.12), 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.