FCCM.NEO vs. NNRG.NEO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

FCCM.NEO (Fidelity Canadian Momentum Index ETF) and NNRG.NEO (Ninepoint Energy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FCCM.NEO is a Momentum fund tracking the Fidelity Canada Canadian Momentum Index, while NNRG.NEO is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P/TSX Capped Energy Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FCCM.NEO returned 19.08%/yr vs 34.11%/yr for NNRG.NEO. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FCCM.NEO charges 0.38%/yr vs 1.79%/yr for NNRG.NEO.

Performance

FCCM.NEO vs. NNRG.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Fidelity Canadian Momentum Index ETF (FCCM.NEO) and Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCCM.NEO achieves a 11.11% return, which is significantly lower than NNRG.NEO's 47.23% return.

FCCM.NEO

• 1D: 1.32%
• 1M: 3.24%
• YTD: 11.11%
• 6M: 12.84%
• 1Y: 44.14%
• 3Y*: 29.52%
• 5Y*: 19.08%
• 10Y*: —

NNRG.NEO

• 1D: 1.12%
• 1M: -0.66%
• YTD: 47.23%
• 6M: 39.75%
• 1Y: 71.20%
• 3Y*: 26.98%
• 5Y*: 34.11%
• 10Y*: —

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

FCCM.NEO vs. NNRG.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FCCM.NEO Fidelity Canadian Momentum Index ETF	11.11%	43.17%	27.03%	10.10%	-3.42%	13.26%
NNRG.NEO Ninepoint Energy ETF	47.23%	19.14%	13.26%	-4.21%	66.18%	55.91%

Correlation

The correlation between FCCM.NEO and NNRG.NEO is -0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.09
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.16
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.23
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2021	0.23

The correlation between FCCM.NEO and NNRG.NEO shifts across timeframes, from -0.09 (1 year) to 0.23 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FCCM.NEO vs. NNRG.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCCM.NEO

FCCM.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 82
FCCM.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
FCCM.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
FCCM.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 86
FCCM.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
FCCM.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 80

NNRG.NEO

NNRG.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 83
NNRG.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
NNRG.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
NNRG.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 81
NNRG.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
NNRG.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 74

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.

FCCM.NEO vs. NNRG.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Canadian Momentum Index ETF (FCCM.NEO) and Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO). 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.

	FCCM.NEO	NNRG.NEO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.85	2.92	-0.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.66	3.45	+0.20
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.48	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.59	6.60	-3.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.61	13.91	+1.71
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FCCM.NEO vs. NNRG.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCCM.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 2.85, which is comparable to the NNRG.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 2.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCCM.NEO and NNRG.NEO, 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

	FCCM.NEO	NNRG.NEO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.85	2.92	-0.08
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.42	0.99	+0.43
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.34	1.08	+0.26

Drawdowns

FCCM.NEO vs. NNRG.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCCM.NEO drawdown since its inception was -16.59%, smaller than the maximum NNRG.NEO drawdown of -35.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCCM.NEO and NNRG.NEO.

Drawdown Indicators

	FCCM.NEO	NNRG.NEO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.59%	-35.78%	+19.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.36%	-10.84%	-1.52%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.36%	-23.52%	+11.16%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.59%	-35.78%	+19.19%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.19%	-3.63%	+2.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.60%	-9.58%	+6.98%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.83%	5.14%	-2.31%

Volatility

FCCM.NEO vs. NNRG.NEO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Canadian Momentum Index ETF (FCCM.NEO) is 5.20%, while Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO) has a volatility of 10.30%. This indicates that FCCM.NEO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NNRG.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FCCM.NEO	NNRG.NEO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.20%	10.30%	-5.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.63%	20.65%	-8.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.60%	24.55%	-8.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.47%	34.60%	-21.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.41%	34.55%	-21.14%

FCCM.NEO vs. NNRG.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

FCCM.NEO has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is lower than NNRG.NEO's 1.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

FCCM.NEO vs. NNRG.NEO - Dividend Comparison

FCCM.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.82%, more than NNRG.NEO's 0.51% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FCCM.NEO Fidelity Canadian Momentum Index ETF	0.82%	0.91%	0.91%	1.32%	1.79%	1.49%	0.78%
NNRG.NEO Ninepoint Energy ETF	0.51%	0.37%	0.39%	0.38%	9.08%	1.92%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FCCM.NEO and NNRG.NEO in my portfolio?

FCCM.NEO and NNRG.NEO have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FCCM.NEO or NNRG.NEO?

On fees, FCCM.NEO is cheaper at 0.38% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FCCM.NEO or NNRG.NEO?

FCCM.NEO is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 1.79% for NNRG.NEO.

What is the main difference between FCCM.NEO and NNRG.NEO?

FCCM.NEO is categorized as Momentum, while NNRG.NEO is Energy Equities. FCCM.NEO tracks Fidelity Canada Canadian Momentum Index, while NNRG.NEO tracks S&P/TSX Capped Energy Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Ninepoint. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for FCCM.NEO and 1.79% for NNRG.NEO.