FCGCX vs. EAPCX

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

FCGCX (Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C) and EAPCX (Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A) are both Commodities funds. Over the past 10 years, FCGCX returned 11.44%/yr vs 10.62%/yr for EAPCX. Their 0.60 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. FCGCX charges 1.97%/yr vs 0.91%/yr for EAPCX.

Performance

FCGCX vs. EAPCX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C (FCGCX) and Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A (EAPCX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with FCGCX having a 20.45% return and EAPCX slightly lower at 19.85%. Over the past 10 years, FCGCX has outperformed EAPCX with an annualized return of 11.44%, while EAPCX has yielded a comparatively lower 10.62% annualized return.

FCGCX

• 1D: 1.16%
• 1M: 7.43%
• 6M: 7.22%
• YTD: 20.45%
• 1Y: 41.97%
• 3Y*: 14.36%
• 5Y*: 12.96%
• 10Y*: 11.44%
• ALL TIME*: 6.71%

EAPCX

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: 5.51%
• 6M: 11.51%
• YTD: 19.85%
• 1Y: 36.85%
• 3Y*: 14.64%
• 5Y*: 13.40%
• 10Y*: 10.62%
• ALL TIME*: 3.73%

*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)
EAPCX Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
FCGCX Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00

FCGCX vs. EAPCX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FCGCX Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C	20.45%	27.29%	1.90%	-6.06%	19.45%	24.85%	4.96%	16.74%	-14.07%	17.33%
EAPCX Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A	19.85%	22.06%	9.63%	-4.87%	17.26%	29.92%	7.77%	9.19%	-9.60%	6.71%

Correlation

The correlation between FCGCX and EAPCX is 0.64, 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.	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.62
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.63
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2012	0.60

The correlation between FCGCX and EAPCX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FCGCX vs. EAPCX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCGCX

FCGCX Risk / Return Rank: 86
FCGCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
FCGCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
FCGCX Omega Ratio Rank: 82
FCGCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
FCGCX Martin Ratio Rank: 84

EAPCX

EAPCX Risk / Return Rank: 84
EAPCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
EAPCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
EAPCX Omega Ratio Rank: 85
EAPCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
EAPCX Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

FCGCX vs. EAPCX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C (FCGCX) and Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A (EAPCX). 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.

	FCGCX	EAPCX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.32	2.36	-0.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.94	3.08	-0.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.41	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.20	2.77	+0.43
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.68	9.01	+1.67

FCGCX vs. EAPCX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCGCX Sharpe Ratio is 2.32, which is comparable to the EAPCX Sharpe Ratio of 2.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCGCX and EAPCX, 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

FCGCX vs. EAPCX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCGCX drawdown since its inception was -59.67%, which is greater than EAPCX's maximum drawdown of -52.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCGCX and EAPCX.

Drawdown Indicators

	FCGCX	EAPCX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.67%	-52.59%	-7.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.36%	-12.23%	-0.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.96%	-12.23%	-7.73%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.43%	-18.05%	-9.38%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-49.31%	-28.81%	-20.50%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.52%	-5.88%	+1.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.08%	-22.60%	+1.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.70%	3.78%	-0.08%

Volatility

FCGCX vs. EAPCX - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C (FCGCX) has a higher volatility of 4.39% compared to Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A (EAPCX) at 3.54%. This indicates that FCGCX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EAPCX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FCGCX	EAPCX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.39%	3.54%	+0.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.82%	11.27%	+2.55%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.14%	14.37%	+2.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.27%	14.55%	+6.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.35%	13.27%	+9.08%

FCGCX vs. EAPCX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FCGCX has a 1.97% expense ratio, which is higher than EAPCX's 0.91% expense ratio.

Dividends

FCGCX vs. EAPCX - Dividend Comparison

FCGCX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.23%, less than EAPCX's 11.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EAPCX Parametric Commodity Strategy Fund Class A	11.04%	13.23%	5.46%	3.43%	14.80%	13.74%	3.01%	1.11%	0.41%	4.98%	6.49%	0.00%
FCGCX Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C	1.23%	1.48%	1.38%	0.80%	1.09%	2.41%	0.59%	1.94%	1.11%	0.36%	0.71%	1.49%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FCGCX and EAPCX in my portfolio?

FCGCX and EAPCX have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FCGCX or EAPCX?

FCGCX has higher volatility (4.39%) compared to EAPCX (3.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCGCX dropped -59.67% vs EAPCX's -52.59%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EAPCX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.36 vs 2.32), 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.