FCLD vs. VGT

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

FCLD (Fidelity Cloud Computing ETF) and VGT (Vanguard Information Technology ETF) are both Technology Equities funds - FCLD tracks the Fidelity Cloud Computing Index - Benchmark TR Gross while VGT tracks the MSCI USA IMI Information Technology 25/50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FCLD returned 24.46%/yr vs 28.00%/yr for VGT. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FCLD charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for VGT.

Performance

FCLD vs. VGT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Cloud Computing ETF (FCLD) and Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCLD achieves a 31.94% return, which is significantly higher than VGT's 22.94% return.

FCLD

• 1D: -0.76%
• 1M: 4.41%
• 6M: 26.87%
• YTD: 31.94%
• 1Y: 42.76%
• 3Y*: 24.46%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

VGT

• 1D: -2.12%
• 1M: -0.88%
• 6M: 21.06%
• YTD: 22.94%
• 1Y: 38.55%
• 3Y*: 28.00%
• 5Y*: 18.46%
• 10Y*: 24.67%

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

FCLD vs. VGT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FCLD Fidelity Cloud Computing ETF	31.94%	8.19%	21.80%	53.05%	-41.32%	-1.59%
VGT Vanguard Information Technology ETF	22.94%	21.77%	29.30%	52.66%	-29.70%	13.19%

Correlation

The correlation between FCLD and VGT is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 7, 2021	0.82

The correlation between FCLD and VGT shifts across timeframes, from 0.70 (1 year) to 0.82 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FCLD vs. VGT — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCLD

FCLD Risk / Return Rank: 54
FCLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
FCLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
FCLD Omega Ratio Rank: 50
FCLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
FCLD Martin Ratio Rank: 46

VGT

VGT Risk / Return Rank: 57
VGT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
VGT Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
VGT Omega Ratio Rank: 57
VGT Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
VGT Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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.

FCLD vs. VGT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Cloud Computing ETF (FCLD) and Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT). 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.

	FCLD	VGT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.51	1.66	-0.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.09	2.17	-0.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.28	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.46	2.36	+0.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.00	6.86	-0.86

FCLD vs. VGT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCLD Sharpe Ratio is 1.51, which is comparable to the VGT Sharpe Ratio of 1.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCLD and VGT, 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

FCLD vs. VGT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCLD drawdown since its inception was -50.85%, smaller than the maximum VGT drawdown of -54.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCLD and VGT.

Drawdown Indicators

	FCLD	VGT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-50.85%	-54.63%	+3.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.48%	-16.40%	-1.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-34.80%	-27.23%	-7.57%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.07%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.07%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.87%	-7.99%	+2.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.22%	-7.94%	-12.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.14%	5.63%	+1.51%

Volatility

FCLD vs. VGT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Cloud Computing ETF (FCLD) is 7.39%, while Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT) has a volatility of 9.66%. This indicates that FCLD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VGT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FCLD	VGT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.39%	9.66%	-2.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.96%	19.38%	+3.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.44%	23.37%	+5.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.47%	25.69%	+4.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.47%	24.80%	+5.67%

FCLD vs. VGT - Expense Ratio Comparison

FCLD has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than VGT's 0.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

FCLD vs. VGT - Dividend Comparison

FCLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%, less than VGT's 0.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FCLD Fidelity Cloud Computing ETF	0.01%	0.03%	0.13%	0.17%	0.26%	0.13%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VGT Vanguard Information Technology ETF	0.37%	0.40%	0.60%	0.65%	0.91%	0.64%	0.82%	1.11%	1.29%	0.99%	1.31%	1.28%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FCLD and VGT in my portfolio?

FCLD and VGT have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FCLD or VGT?

VGT has higher volatility (9.66%) compared to FCLD (7.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCLD dropped -50.85% vs VGT's -54.63%.

Which ETF is better, FCLD or VGT?

On 3-year performance, VGT leads with 28.00% vs 24.46% for FCLD. On fees, VGT is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, FCLD has been the lower-risk option at 7.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FCLD or VGT?

Over the 3-year period, VGT has performed better with a 28.00% return vs 24.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FCLD or VGT?

VGT is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for FCLD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FCLD or VGT?

VGT has the higher dividend yield at 0.37%, compared with 0.01% for FCLD.

What is the main difference between FCLD and VGT?

FCLD tracks Fidelity Cloud Computing Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while VGT tracks MSCI USA IMI Information Technology 25/50 Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for FCLD and 0.09% for VGT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

VGT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.66 vs 1.51), 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.