FCOM vs. FBMPX

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

FCOM (Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF) and FBMPX (Fidelity Select Communication Services Portfolio) are both funds - FCOM is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Communication Services 25/50 Index, while FBMPX is a Communications Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. FCOM is passively managed, while FBMPX is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, FCOM returned 10.64%/yr vs 16.31%/yr for FBMPX. Their correlation of 0.83 means they have usually moved in the same direction. FCOM charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.64%/yr for FBMPX.

Performance

FCOM vs. FBMPX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF (FCOM) and Fidelity Select Communication Services Portfolio (FBMPX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCOM achieves a -5.84% return, which is significantly lower than FBMPX's 2.86% return. Over the past 10 years, FCOM has underperformed FBMPX with an annualized return of 10.64%, while FBMPX has yielded a comparatively higher 16.31% annualized return.

FCOM

• 1D: 1.18%
• 1M: -3.04%
• 6M: -8.54%
• YTD: -5.84%
• 1Y: 6.69%
• 3Y*: 18.54%
• 5Y*: 5.58%
• 10Y*: 10.64%
• ALL TIME*: 10.59%

FBMPX

• 1D: -1.81%
• 1M: -5.72%
• 6M: -1.53%
• YTD: 2.86%
• 1Y: 17.82%
• 3Y*: 27.10%
• 5Y*: 11.71%
• 10Y*: 16.31%
• ALL TIME*: 13.34%

*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)
FBMPX Fidelity Select Communication Services Portfolio	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
FCOM Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF	$15.12M	$14.12M	$12.44M

FCOM vs. FBMPX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FCOM Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF	-5.84%	26.06%	33.05%	44.65%	-38.97%	13.88%	28.33%	26.69%	-5.33%	8.20%
FBMPX Fidelity Select Communication Services Portfolio	2.86%	37.07%	35.98%	56.85%	-38.30%	15.97%	35.48%	33.14%	-3.52%	12.60%

Correlation

The correlation between FCOM and FBMPX is 0.93, 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.	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.95
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.97
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2013	0.83

The correlation between FCOM and FBMPX shifts across timeframes, from 0.83 (all time) to 0.97 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FCOM vs. FBMPX - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FCOM	FBMPX
Communication Services	89.6%	86.7%
Technology	8.0%	9.2%
Industrials	1.7%	0.5%
Consumer Cyclical	0.2%	3.0%
Real Estate	0.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	0.7%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FCOM vs. FBMPX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCOM

FCOM Risk / Return Rank: 17
FCOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
FCOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
FCOM Omega Ratio Rank: 16
FCOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
FCOM Martin Ratio Rank: 18

FBMPX

FBMPX Risk / Return Rank: 26
FBMPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
FBMPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
FBMPX Omega Ratio Rank: 27
FBMPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
FBMPX Martin Ratio Rank: 26

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.

FCOM vs. FBMPX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF (FCOM) and Fidelity Select Communication Services Portfolio (FBMPX). 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.

	FCOM	FBMPX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.27	0.87	-0.60
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.50	1.31	-0.81
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.16	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.34	1.05	-0.71
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.02	3.58	-2.56

FCOM vs. FBMPX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCOM Sharpe Ratio is 0.27, which is lower than the FBMPX Sharpe Ratio of 0.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCOM and FBMPX, 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

FCOM vs. FBMPX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCOM drawdown since its inception was -46.76%, smaller than the maximum FBMPX drawdown of -61.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCOM and FBMPX.

Drawdown Indicators

	FCOM	FBMPX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.76%	-61.77%	+15.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.48%	-16.90%	+3.42%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.16%	-23.20%	+2.04%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-46.76%	-47.42%	+0.66%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.76%	-47.42%	+0.66%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.98%	-9.34%	+0.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.64%	-10.61%	+1.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.50%	4.97%	-0.47%

Volatility

FCOM vs. FBMPX - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF (FCOM) and Fidelity Select Communication Services Portfolio (FBMPX) have volatilities of 6.61% and 6.85%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FCOM	FBMPX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.61%	6.85%	-0.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.32%	16.12%	-2.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.05%	20.50%	-3.45%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.41%	23.50%	-2.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.07%	22.09%	-1.02%

FCOM vs. FBMPX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FCOM has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than FBMPX's 0.64% expense ratio.

Dividends

FCOM vs. FBMPX - Dividend Comparison

FCOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.02%, less than FBMPX's 13.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FBMPX Fidelity Select Communication Services Portfolio	13.02%	8.09%	7.05%	0.00%	0.00%	5.88%	3.74%	35.43%	15.29%	5.53%	7.50%	7.29%
FCOM Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF	1.02%	0.88%	0.87%	0.77%	1.04%	0.90%	0.68%	0.86%	2.78%	11.70%	2.27%	2.92%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FCOM and FBMPX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, FCOM and FBMPX 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.

Which is riskier, FCOM or FBMPX?

FBMPX has higher volatility (6.85%) compared to FCOM (6.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCOM dropped -46.76% vs FBMPX's -61.77%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FBMPX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.87 vs 0.27), 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.