FCOM vs. FBTC

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

FCOM (Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF) and FBTC (Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - FCOM is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Communication Services 25/50 Index, while FBTC is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the Fidelity Bitcoin Reference Rate. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FCOM returned 13.62% vs -47.53% for FBTC. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FCOM charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for FBTC.

Performance

FCOM vs. FBTC - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCOM achieves a -1.28% return, which is significantly higher than FBTC's -28.99% return.

FCOM

• 1D: -0.47%
• 1M: 1.95%
• 6M: -2.06%
• YTD: -1.28%
• 1Y: 13.62%
• 3Y*: 21.28%
• 5Y*: 6.76%
• 10Y*: 10.74%

FBTC

• 1D: -2.67%
• 1M: -2.20%
• 6M: -32.07%
• YTD: -28.99%
• 1Y: -47.53%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FCOM vs. FBTC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FCOM Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF	-1.28%	26.06%	31.64%
FBTC Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund	-28.99%	-6.56%	94.28%

Correlation

The correlation between FCOM and FBTC is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024	0.34

Return for Risk

FCOM vs. FBTC — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCOM

FCOM Risk / Return Rank: 28
FCOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
FCOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
FCOM Omega Ratio Rank: 28
FCOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
FCOM Martin Ratio Rank: 29

FBTC

FBTC Risk / Return Rank: 1
FBTC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
FBTC Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
FBTC Omega Ratio Rank: 1
FBTC Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
FBTC Martin Ratio Rank: 1

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.

FCOM vs. FBTC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF (FCOM) and Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund (FBTC). 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	FBTC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.85	-1.08	+1.93
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.31	-1.66	+2.97
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	0.82	+0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.01	-0.89	+1.91
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.30	-1.46	+4.75

FCOM vs. FBTC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCOM Sharpe Ratio is 0.85, which is higher than the FBTC Sharpe Ratio of -1.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCOM and FBTC, 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. FBTC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCOM drawdown since its inception was -46.76%, smaller than the maximum FBTC drawdown of -53.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCOM and FBTC.

Drawdown Indicators

	FCOM	FBTC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.76%	-53.35%	+6.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.48%	-53.35%	+39.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.16%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-46.76%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.76%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.58%	-50.54%	+45.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.64%	-17.49%	+8.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.14%	32.68%	-28.54%

Volatility

FCOM vs. FBTC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF (FCOM) is 6.35%, while Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund (FBTC) has a volatility of 11.38%. This indicates that FCOM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FBTC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FCOM	FBTC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.35%	11.38%	-5.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.57%	34.71%	-22.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.14%	44.27%	-28.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.33%	49.84%	-28.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.01%	49.84%	-28.83%

FCOM vs. FBTC - Expense Ratio Comparison

FCOM has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than FBTC's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FCOM vs. FBTC - Dividend Comparison

FCOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.98%, while FBTC has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FBTC Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FCOM Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF	0.98%	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 FBTC in my portfolio?

FCOM and FBTC have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FCOM or FBTC?

FBTC has higher volatility (11.38%) compared to FCOM (6.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCOM dropped -46.76% vs FBTC's -53.35%.

Which ETF is better, FCOM or FBTC?

On 1-year performance, FCOM leads with 13.62% vs -47.53% for FBTC. On fees, FCOM is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, FCOM has been the lower-risk option at 6.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FCOM or FBTC?

Over the 1-year period, FCOM has performed better with a 13.62% return vs -47.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FCOM or FBTC?

FCOM is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for FBTC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FCOM or FBTC?

FCOM has the higher dividend yield at 0.98%, compared with 0.00% for FBTC.

What is the main difference between FCOM and FBTC?

FCOM is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while FBTC is Cryptocurrency. FCOM tracks MSCI USA IMI Communication Services 25/50 Index, while FBTC tracks Fidelity Bitcoin Reference Rate. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for FCOM and 0.25% for FBTC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FCOM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.85 vs -1.08), 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.