FDFF vs. FDIQ
FDFF (Fidelity Disruptive Finance ETF) and FDIQ (Invesco Bloomberg Financial Data Providers ETF) are both Financials Equities funds. FDFF is actively managed, while FDIQ is passively managed. Over the past year, FDFF returned -13.28% vs 22.98% for FDIQ. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FDFF charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for FDIQ.
Performance
FDFF vs. FDIQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FDFF achieves a -9.77% return, which is significantly lower than FDIQ's 9.72% return.
FDFF
- 1D
- -2.74%
- 1M
- -4.96%
- YTD
- -9.77%
- 6M
- -7.73%
- 1Y
- -13.28%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FDIQ
- 1D
- -0.97%
- 1M
- -5.53%
- YTD
- 9.72%
- 6M
- 10.28%
- 1Y
- 22.98%
- 3Y*
- 18.27%
- 5Y*
- 3.82%
- 10Y*
- 7.60%
FDFF vs. FDIQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FDFF Fidelity Disruptive Finance ETF | -9.77% | -2.75% | 27.86% | 15.99% |
FDIQ Invesco Bloomberg Financial Data Providers ETF | 9.72% | 6.32% | 12.76% | 22.77% |
Correlation
The correlation between FDFF and FDIQ is 0.60, 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 | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2023 | 0.62 |
The correlation between FDFF and FDIQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.62 - 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
FDFF vs. FDIQ — Risk / Return Rank
FDFF
FDIQ
FDFF vs. FDIQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Disruptive Finance ETF (FDFF) and Invesco Bloomberg Financial Data Providers ETF (FDIQ). 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.
| FDFF | FDIQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.78 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.51 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.89 | 1.20 | -0.31 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.60 | 2.07 | -2.67 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.23 | 5.26 | -6.49 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FDFF | FDIQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.73 | 1.04 | -1.78 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.13 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.24 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.49 | 0.37 | +0.12 |
Drawdowns
FDFF vs. FDIQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FDFF drawdown since its inception was -23.06%, smaller than the maximum FDIQ drawdown of -52.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDFF and FDIQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FDFF | FDIQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.06% | -52.86% | +29.80% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.31% | -11.13% | -11.18% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -28.09% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -42.99% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -52.86% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -18.05% | -8.53% | -9.52% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.32% | -11.56% | +5.24% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.82% | 4.38% | +6.44% |
Volatility
FDFF vs. FDIQ - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity Disruptive Finance ETF (FDFF) has a higher volatility of 4.48% compared to Invesco Bloomberg Financial Data Providers ETF (FDIQ) at 4.06%. This indicates that FDFF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FDIQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FDFF | FDIQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.48% | 4.06% | +0.42% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.18% | 13.93% | +0.25% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.21% | 22.14% | -3.93% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.02% | 28.70% | -9.68% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.02% | 31.12% | -12.10% |
FDFF vs. FDIQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
FDFF has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FDIQ's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
FDFF vs. FDIQ - Dividend Comparison
FDFF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, less than FDIQ's 2.56% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FDFF Fidelity Disruptive Finance ETF | 1.01% | 0.86% | 0.70% | 0.27% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
FDIQ Invesco Bloomberg Financial Data Providers ETF | 2.56% | 2.66% | 2.69% | 2.89% | 2.51% | 2.04% | 2.92% | 2.44% | 2.45% | 1.59% | 1.50% | 1.92% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FDFF and FDIQ have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FDFF has higher volatility (4.48%) compared to FDIQ (4.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDFF dropped -23.06% vs FDIQ's -52.86%.
On 1-year performance, FDIQ leads with 22.98% vs -13.28% for FDFF. On fees, FDIQ is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, FDIQ has been the lower-risk option at 4.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, FDIQ has performed better with a 22.98% return vs -13.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FDIQ is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FDFF.
FDIQ has the higher dividend yield at 2.56%, compared with 1.01% for FDFF.
They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FDFF and 0.35% for FDIQ.
FDIQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.04 vs -0.73), 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.
Find the right allocation for FDFF and FDIQ
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