FCCGX vs. IWM
FCCGX (Fidelity Advisor Small Cap Growth Fund Class C) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both funds - FCCGX is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund managed by Fidelity, while IWM is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Index. Over the past 10 years, FCCGX returned 13.12%/yr vs 10.70%/yr for IWM. Their correlation of 0.93 means they have usually moved in the same direction. FCCGX charges 2.05%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.
Performance
FCCGX vs. IWM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FCCGX achieves a 20.25% return, which is significantly higher than IWM's 18.79% return. Over the past 10 years, FCCGX has outperformed IWM with an annualized return of 13.12%, while IWM has yielded a comparatively lower 10.70% annualized return.
FCCGX
- 1D
- 2.53%
- 1M
- -3.13%
- 6M
- 15.80%
- YTD
- 20.25%
- 1Y
- 35.21%
- 3Y*
- 17.49%
- 5Y*
- 6.80%
- 10Y*
- 13.12%
- ALL TIME*
- 10.64%
IWM
- 1D
- -0.48%
- 1M
- -2.14%
- 6M
- 12.62%
- YTD
- 18.79%
- 1Y
- 36.90%
- 3Y*
- 15.11%
- 5Y*
- 6.99%
- 10Y*
- 10.70%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.73%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | |
| $6.67B | $6.32B | $7.45B |
FCCGX vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FCCGX Fidelity Advisor Small Cap Growth Fund Class C | 20.25% | 10.01% | 19.28% | 17.84% | -26.11% | 9.29% | 35.00% | 34.94% | -5.56% | 27.60% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 18.79% | 12.66% | 11.38% | 16.83% | -20.48% | 14.54% | 20.03% | 25.39% | -11.12% | 14.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between FCCGX and IWM is 0.94, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.94 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.94 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.95 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.92 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 4, 2004 | 0.93 |
The correlation between FCCGX and IWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
FCCGX vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank
FCCGX
IWM
FCCGX vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Advisor Small Cap Growth Fund Class C (FCCGX) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). 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.
| FCCGX | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.39 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.54 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.30 | -0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.36 | 3.11 | -0.74 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.84 | 11.02 | -2.18 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FCCGX vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FCCGX drawdown since its inception was -61.43%, roughly equal to the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCCGX and IWM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FCCGX | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -61.43% | -59.05% | -2.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.30% | -11.03% | -2.27% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -28.93% | -27.50% | -1.43% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -39.42% | -31.91% | -7.51% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.42% | -41.13% | +1.71% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.30% | -3.08% | -2.22% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.84% | -10.71% | -1.13% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.56% | 3.11% | +0.45% |
Volatility
FCCGX vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity Advisor Small Cap Growth Fund Class C (FCCGX) has a higher volatility of 6.01% compared to iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) at 3.82%. This indicates that FCCGX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IWM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FCCGX | IWM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.01% | 3.82% | +2.19% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.98% | 14.12% | +3.86% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.73% | 19.41% | +3.32% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.73% | 22.48% | +1.25% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.94% | 23.01% | -0.07% |
FCCGX vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison
FCCGX has a 2.05% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio.
Dividends
FCCGX vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison
FCCGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.35%, more than IWM's 0.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FCCGX Fidelity Advisor Small Cap Growth Fund Class C | 7.35% | 8.84% | 0.86% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 24.00% | 9.80% | 6.42% | 16.17% | 7.56% | 0.87% | 4.12% |
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF | 0.91% | 1.04% | 1.15% | 1.35% | 1.48% | 0.94% | 1.04% | 1.26% | 1.40% | 1.26% | 1.38% | 1.54% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.94, FCCGX and IWM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
FCCGX has higher volatility (6.01%) compared to IWM (3.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCCGX dropped -61.43% vs IWM's -59.05%.
IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 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.
Find the right allocation for FCCGX and IWM
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