FCOM vs. FNCL
Compare and contrast key facts about Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF (FCOM) and Fidelity MSCI Financials Index ETF (FNCL).
FCOM and FNCL are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. FCOM is a passively managed fund by Fidelity that tracks the performance of the MSCI USA IMI Telecommunication Services 25/50 Index. It was launched on Oct 21, 2013. FNCL is a passively managed fund by Fidelity that tracks the performance of the MSCI USA IMI Financials Index. It was launched on Oct 21, 2013. Both FCOM and FNCL are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: FCOM or FNCL.
Key characteristics
| FCOM | FNCL | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 14.05% | 12.07% |
| 1Y Return | 33.17% | 34.61% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 1.07% | 6.03% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 9.70% | 11.28% |
| 10Y Return (Ann) | 9.15% | 11.11% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 2.08 | 2.71 |
| Daily Std Dev | 16.99% | 13.10% |
| Max Drawdown | -46.76% | -44.38% |
| Current Drawdown | -8.95% | 0.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between FCOM and FNCL is 0.59, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Performance
FCOM vs. FNCL - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, FCOM achieves a 14.05% return, which is significantly higher than FNCL's 12.07% return. Over the past 10 years, FCOM has underperformed FNCL with an annualized return of 9.15%, while FNCL has yielded a comparatively higher 11.11% annualized return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
FCOM vs. FNCL - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both FCOM and FNCL 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%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
FCOM vs. FNCL - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF (FCOM) and Fidelity MSCI Financials Index ETF (FNCL). 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.
Dividends
FCOM vs. FNCL - Dividend Comparison
FCOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.73%, less than FNCL's 1.68% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FCOM Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF | 0.73% | 0.77% | 1.04% | 0.90% | 0.68% | 0.86% | 2.78% | 7.54% | 2.25% | 2.92% | 2.69% | 0.25% |
FNCL Fidelity MSCI Financials Index ETF | 1.68% | 1.91% | 2.29% | 1.75% | 2.26% | 2.17% | 2.37% | 1.60% | 1.81% | 2.17% | 1.77% | 0.43% |
Drawdowns
FCOM vs. FNCL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FCOM drawdown since its inception was -46.76%, which is greater than FNCL's maximum drawdown of -44.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCOM and FNCL. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
FCOM vs. FNCL - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity MSCI Communication Services Index ETF (FCOM) has a higher volatility of 6.33% compared to Fidelity MSCI Financials Index ETF (FNCL) at 2.96%. This indicates that FCOM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNCL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.