FCOM vs. FMAT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FCOM (Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF) and FMAT (Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FCOM is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Telecommunication Services 25/50 Index, while FMAT is a Materials fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Materials Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FCOM returned 11.99%/yr vs 10.33%/yr for FMAT. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.08% expense ratio.

Performance

FCOM vs. FMAT - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCOM achieves a -1.60% return, which is significantly lower than FMAT's 13.04% return. Over the past 10 years, FCOM has outperformed FMAT with an annualized return of 11.99%, while FMAT has yielded a comparatively lower 10.33% annualized return.

FCOM

• 1D: -0.87%
• 1M: -2.85%
• YTD: -1.60%
• 6M: 0.27%
• 1Y: 20.03%
• 3Y*: 23.77%
• 5Y*: 7.42%
• 10Y*: 11.99%

FMAT

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: 2.43%
• YTD: 13.04%
• 6M: 16.00%
• 1Y: 22.50%
• 3Y*: 12.38%
• 5Y*: 5.79%
• 10Y*: 10.33%

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

FCOM vs. FMAT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FCOM Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF	-1.60%	26.06%	33.05%	44.65%	-38.97%	13.88%	28.33%	26.69%	-5.33%	8.20%
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	13.04%	12.11%	0.47%	13.71%	-11.54%	27.45%	19.57%	23.35%	-17.40%	23.51%

Correlation

The correlation between FCOM and FMAT is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.48
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.57
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2013	0.56

The correlation between FCOM and FMAT shifts across timeframes, from 0.37 (1 year) to 0.57 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FCOM vs. FMAT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FCOM	FMAT
Communication Services	98.5%	-
Technology	1.2%	0.1%
Consumer Cyclical	0.3%	8.3%
Real Estate	0.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	90.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	0.1%
Energy	-	0.6%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	0.5%
Industrials	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FCOM vs. FMAT — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCOM

FCOM Risk / Return Rank: 34
FCOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
FCOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
FCOM Omega Ratio Rank: 34
FCOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
FCOM Martin Ratio Rank: 36

FMAT

FMAT Risk / Return Rank: 34
FMAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
FMAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
FMAT Omega Ratio Rank: 32
FMAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
FMAT Martin Ratio Rank: 35

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. FMAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	FCOM	FMAT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.31	1.28	+0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.97	1.85	+0.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.22	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.49	1.68	-0.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.67	5.51	+0.16
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FCOM vs. FMAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCOM Sharpe Ratio is 1.31, which is comparable to the FMAT Sharpe Ratio of 1.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCOM and FMAT, 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

	FCOM	FMAT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.31	1.28	+0.03
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.35	0.30	+0.06
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.57	0.49	+0.08
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.57	0.45	+0.12

Drawdowns

FCOM vs. FMAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCOM drawdown since its inception was -46.76%, which is greater than FMAT's maximum drawdown of -41.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCOM and FMAT.

Drawdown Indicators

	FCOM	FMAT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.76%	-41.11%	-5.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.48%	-13.48%	0.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.16%	-23.17%	+2.01%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-46.76%	-25.40%	-21.36%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.76%	-41.11%	-5.65%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.88%	-3.97%	-0.91%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.66%	-6.87%	-1.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.54%	4.09%	-0.55%

Volatility

FCOM vs. FMAT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF (FCOM) is 4.24%, while Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) has a volatility of 6.14%. This indicates that FCOM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FMAT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FCOM	FMAT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.24%	6.14%	-1.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.02%	13.95%	-2.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.38%	17.66%	-2.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.17%	19.60%	+1.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.96%	21.19%	-0.23%

FCOM vs. FMAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FCOM and FMAT have an expense ratio of 0.08%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FCOM vs. FMAT - Dividend Comparison

FCOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.94%, less than FMAT's 1.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FCOM Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF	0.94%	0.88%	0.87%	0.77%	1.04%	0.90%	0.68%	0.86%	2.78%	11.70%	2.27%	2.92%
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	1.42%	1.64%	1.68%	1.71%	2.00%	1.44%	1.73%	1.89%	2.18%	1.53%	1.78%	2.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FCOM and FMAT in my portfolio?

FCOM and FMAT have a correlation of 0.37, 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 FMAT?

FMAT has higher volatility (6.14%) compared to FCOM (4.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCOM dropped -46.76% vs FMAT's -41.11%.

Which ETF is better, FCOM or FMAT?

On 10-year performance, FCOM leads with 11.99% vs 10.33% for FMAT. Both ETFs have the same 0.08% expense ratio. On volatility, FCOM has been the lower-risk option at 4.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FCOM or FMAT?

Over the 10-year period, FCOM has performed better with a 11.99% return vs 10.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FCOM or FMAT?

FCOM and FMAT have the same expense ratio: 0.08% per year.

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

FMAT has the higher dividend yield at 1.42%, compared with 0.94% for FCOM.

What is the main difference between FCOM and FMAT?

FCOM is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while FMAT is Materials. FCOM tracks MSCI USA IMI Telecommunication Services 25/50 Index, while FMAT tracks MSCI USA IMI Materials Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FCOM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.31 vs 1.28), 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.