PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FCVFX vs. NMAVX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FCVFX vs. NMAVX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Advisor Value Fund Class C (FCVFX) and Nuance Mid Cap Value Fund (NMAVX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCVFX achieves a 15.86% return, which is significantly higher than NMAVX's 4.74% return. Over the past 10 years, FCVFX has outperformed NMAVX with an annualized return of 12.35%, while NMAVX has yielded a comparatively lower 7.40% annualized return.


FCVFX

1D
0.21%
1M
1.99%
YTD
15.86%
6M
18.65%
1Y
34.92%
3Y*
22.76%
5Y*
11.87%
10Y*
12.35%

NMAVX

1D
-0.76%
1M
2.68%
YTD
4.74%
6M
5.75%
1Y
12.11%
3Y*
4.80%
5Y*
2.76%
10Y*
7.40%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FCVFX vs. NMAVX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FCVFX
Fidelity Advisor Value Fund Class C
15.86%10.14%24.29%18.53%-10.07%33.72%8.57%30.36%-18.65%14.05%
NMAVX
Nuance Mid Cap Value Fund
4.74%1.91%5.20%6.44%-5.26%11.10%4.41%30.71%-5.44%14.81%

Correlation

The correlation between FCVFX and NMAVX is 0.74, 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

0.74

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.78

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.79

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.82

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 6, 2014

0.84

The correlation between FCVFX and NMAVX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

FCVFX vs. NMAVX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCVFX
FCVFX Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
FCVFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCVFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCVFX Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
FCVFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCVFX Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
Martin Ratio Rank

NMAVX
NMAVX Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
NMAVX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NMAVX Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
NMAVX Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
NMAVX Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
NMAVX Martin Ratio Rank: 1010
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FCVFX vs. NMAVX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Advisor Value Fund Class C (FCVFX) and Nuance Mid Cap Value Fund (NMAVX). 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.


FCVFXNMAVXDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.15

1.01

+1.14

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.11

1.57

+1.54

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.18

+0.20

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.37

1.17

+2.20

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

12.36

3.01

+9.35

FCVFX vs. NMAVX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCVFX Sharpe Ratio is 2.15, which is higher than the NMAVX Sharpe Ratio of 1.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCVFX and NMAVX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FCVFXNMAVXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.15

1.01

+1.14

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.56

0.21

+0.35

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.55

0.49

+0.06

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.42

0.51

-0.09

Drawdowns

FCVFX vs. NMAVX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCVFX drawdown since its inception was -65.18%, which is greater than NMAVX's maximum drawdown of -30.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCVFX and NMAVX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FCVFXNMAVXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-65.18%

-30.93%

-34.25%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.99%

-9.80%

-0.19%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.74%

-18.40%

-3.34%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.11%

-18.40%

-4.71%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-48.67%

-30.93%

-17.74%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-5.37%

+5.37%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.06%

-3.80%

-5.26%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.72%

3.80%

-1.08%

Volatility

FCVFX vs. NMAVX - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Advisor Value Fund Class C (FCVFX) has a higher volatility of 4.18% compared to Nuance Mid Cap Value Fund (NMAVX) at 3.80%. This indicates that FCVFX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NMAVX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FCVFXNMAVXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.18%

3.80%

+0.38%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.43%

8.06%

+3.37%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.12%

11.54%

+4.58%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.31%

13.33%

+7.98%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.56%

15.04%

+7.52%

FCVFX vs. NMAVX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FCVFX has a 1.90% expense ratio, which is higher than NMAVX's 1.22% expense ratio.


Dividends

FCVFX vs. NMAVX - Dividend Comparison

FCVFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.09%, more than NMAVX's 0.95% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FCVFX
Fidelity Advisor Value Fund Class C
7.09%8.22%25.20%0.12%0.00%4.16%0.00%2.46%14.34%2.34%0.00%1.94%
NMAVX
Nuance Mid Cap Value Fund
0.95%1.00%7.55%1.78%9.05%11.98%0.61%5.91%7.16%7.05%1.83%4.24%

Frequently Asked Questions


FCVFX and NMAVX have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FCVFX has higher volatility (4.18%) compared to NMAVX (3.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCVFX dropped -65.18% vs NMAVX's -30.93%.

FCVFX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.15 vs 1.01), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FCVFX and NMAVX

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer