PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FDCF vs. GAMR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FDCF vs. GAMR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Disruptive Communications ETF (FDCF) and Amplify Video Game Leaders ETF (GAMR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FDCF achieves a 5.62% return, which is significantly higher than GAMR's 3.68% return.


FDCF

1D
-1.77%
1M
3.38%
YTD
5.62%
6M
7.71%
1Y
23.52%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

GAMR

1D
-0.83%
1M
13.55%
YTD
3.68%
6M
1.71%
1Y
19.82%
3Y*
16.12%
5Y*
-0.52%
10Y*
12.82%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FDCF vs. GAMR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
FDCF
Fidelity Disruptive Communications ETF
5.62%27.42%28.37%16.39%
GAMR
Amplify Video Game Leaders ETF
3.68%39.20%11.23%-3.02%

Correlation

The correlation between FDCF and GAMR is 0.75, 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

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2023

0.75

The correlation between FDCF and GAMR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

FDCF vs. GAMR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FDCF
GAMR

Communication Services

50.2%
25.0%

Technology

36.5%
66.0%

Consumer Cyclical

11.9%
8.7%

Industrials

1.4%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

0.1%

Healthcare

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Communication Services

FDCF
50.2%
GAMR
25.0%

Technology

FDCF
36.5%
GAMR
66.0%

Consumer Cyclical

FDCF
11.9%
GAMR
8.7%

Industrials

FDCF
1.4%
GAMR

-

Basic Materials

FDCF

-

GAMR

-

Consumer Defensive

FDCF

-

GAMR

-

Energy

FDCF

-

GAMR

-

Financial Services

FDCF

-

GAMR
0.1%

Healthcare

FDCF

-

GAMR

-

Real Estate

FDCF

-

GAMR

-

Utilities

FDCF

-

GAMR

-

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

FDCF vs. GAMR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FDCF
FDCF Risk / Return Rank: 3131
Overall Rank
FDCF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3535
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FDCF Sortino Ratio Rank: 3333
Sortino Ratio Rank
FDCF Omega Ratio Rank: 3434
Omega Ratio Rank
FDCF Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
FDCF Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
Martin Ratio Rank

GAMR
GAMR Risk / Return Rank: 2121
Overall Rank
GAMR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GAMR Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
GAMR Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
GAMR Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
GAMR Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
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.

FDCF vs. GAMR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Disruptive Communications ETF (FDCF) and Amplify Video Game Leaders ETF (GAMR). 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.


FDCFGAMRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.40

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.49

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.23

1.17

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.31

0.68

+0.63

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.95

1.55

+2.40

FDCF vs. GAMR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FDCF Sharpe Ratio is 1.29, which is higher than the GAMR Sharpe Ratio of 0.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FDCF and GAMR, 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


FDCFGAMRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.29

0.89

+0.40

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.02

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.53

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.29

0.58

+0.72

Drawdowns

FDCF vs. GAMR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FDCF drawdown since its inception was -22.53%, smaller than the maximum GAMR drawdown of -55.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDCF and GAMR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FDCFGAMRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.53%

-55.37%

+32.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-18.10%

-29.36%

+11.26%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.36%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-50.57%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-55.37%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.90%

-13.61%

+11.71%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.17%

-22.13%

+17.96%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.97%

12.82%

-6.85%

Volatility

FDCF vs. GAMR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Disruptive Communications ETF (FDCF) is 4.28%, while Amplify Video Game Leaders ETF (GAMR) has a volatility of 5.88%. This indicates that FDCF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GAMR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FDCFGAMRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.28%

5.88%

-1.60%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.98%

17.37%

-3.39%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.36%

22.32%

-3.96%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.58%

24.35%

-3.77%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.58%

24.27%

-3.69%

FDCF vs. GAMR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FDCF has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than GAMR's 0.59% expense ratio.


Dividends

FDCF vs. GAMR - Dividend Comparison

FDCF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.03%, less than GAMR's 0.50% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
FDCF
Fidelity Disruptive Communications ETF
0.03%0.09%0.25%0.19%
GAMR
Amplify Video Game Leaders ETF
0.50%0.52%0.63%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FDCF and GAMR have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GAMR has higher volatility (5.88%) compared to FDCF (4.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDCF dropped -22.53% vs GAMR's -55.37%.

On 1-year performance, FDCF leads with 23.52% vs 19.82% for GAMR. On fees, FDCF is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, FDCF has been the lower-risk option at 4.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FDCF has performed better with a 23.52% return vs 19.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FDCF is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for GAMR.

GAMR has the higher dividend yield at 0.50%, compared with 0.03% for FDCF.

FDCF is categorized as Communications Equities, while GAMR is Gaming. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FDCF and 0.59% for GAMR.

FDCF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.29 vs 0.89), 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 FDCF and GAMR

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