FDFF vs. ONEQ

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

FDFF (Fidelity Disruptive Finance ETF) and ONEQ (Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FDFF is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while ONEQ is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Composite Index. FDFF is actively managed, while ONEQ is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FDFF returned 10.50%/yr vs 23.49%/yr for ONEQ. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FDFF charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.21%/yr for ONEQ.

Performance

FDFF vs. ONEQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Disruptive Finance ETF (FDFF) and Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF (ONEQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FDFF achieves a -1.88% return, which is significantly lower than ONEQ's 12.20% return.

FDFF

• 1D: 0.39%
• 1M: 6.98%
• 6M: -4.05%
• YTD: -1.88%
• 1Y: -7.57%
• 3Y*: 10.50%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ONEQ

• 1D: -1.57%
• 1M: 0.15%
• 6M: 9.91%
• YTD: 12.20%
• 1Y: 26.97%
• 3Y*: 23.49%
• 5Y*: 13.23%
• 10Y*: 19.04%

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

FDFF vs. ONEQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FDFF Fidelity Disruptive Finance ETF	-1.88%	-2.75%	27.86%	16.58%
ONEQ Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF	12.20%	20.89%	29.30%	14.29%

Correlation

The correlation between FDFF and ONEQ is 0.58, 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	0.58
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 12, 2023	0.64

The correlation between FDFF and ONEQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

FDFF vs. ONEQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FDFF	ONEQ
Financial Services	75.4%	2.9%
Technology	18.8%	54.3%
Industrials	4.2%	2.9%
Real Estate	0.8%	0.6%
Consumer Cyclical	0.8%	12.7%
Basic Materials	-	0.9%
Communication Services	-	15.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	4.4%
Energy	-	0.5%
Healthcare	-	4.7%
Utilities	-	0.8%

Return for Risk

FDFF vs. ONEQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

FDFF

FDFF Risk / Return Rank: 6
FDFF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
FDFF Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
FDFF Omega Ratio Rank: 6
FDFF Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
FDFF Martin Ratio Rank: 6

ONEQ

ONEQ Risk / Return Rank: 55
ONEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
ONEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
ONEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 54
ONEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
ONEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

FDFF vs. ONEQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Disruptive Finance ETF (FDFF) and Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF (ONEQ). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	FDFF	ONEQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.41	1.53	-1.94
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.45	2.11	-2.56
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.95	1.27	-0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.34	2.14	-2.48
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.64	7.79	-8.43

FDFF vs. ONEQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FDFF Sharpe Ratio is -0.41, which is lower than the ONEQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FDFF and ONEQ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FDFF vs. ONEQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FDFF drawdown since its inception was -23.06%, smaller than the maximum ONEQ drawdown of -55.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDFF and ONEQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	FDFF	ONEQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.06%	-55.09%	+32.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.31%	-12.64%	-9.67%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.06%	-24.09%	+1.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.23%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.23%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.89%	-4.22%	-6.67%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.60%	-7.94%	+1.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.77%	3.47%	+8.30%

Volatility

FDFF vs. ONEQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Disruptive Finance ETF (FDFF) is 4.75%, while Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF (ONEQ) has a volatility of 6.80%. This indicates that FDFF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ONEQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FDFF	ONEQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.75%	6.80%	-2.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.68%	14.11%	+0.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.59%	17.69%	+0.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.98%	22.41%	-3.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.98%	21.78%	-2.80%

FDFF vs. ONEQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

FDFF has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than ONEQ's 0.21% expense ratio.

Dividends

FDFF vs. ONEQ - Dividend Comparison

FDFF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, more than ONEQ's 0.86% 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%
ONEQ Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF	0.86%	0.54%	0.65%	0.71%	0.97%	0.54%	0.71%	2.51%	1.08%	0.84%	1.12%	1.04%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FDFF and ONEQ in my portfolio?

FDFF and ONEQ have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FDFF or ONEQ?

ONEQ has higher volatility (6.80%) compared to FDFF (4.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDFF dropped -23.06% vs ONEQ's -55.09%.

Which ETF is better, FDFF or ONEQ?

On 3-year performance, ONEQ leads with 23.49% vs 10.50% for FDFF. On fees, ONEQ is cheaper at 0.21% per year. On volatility, FDFF has been the lower-risk option at 4.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FDFF or ONEQ?

Over the 3-year period, ONEQ has performed better with a 23.49% return vs 10.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FDFF or ONEQ?

ONEQ is cheaper with a 0.21% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FDFF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FDFF or ONEQ?

FDFF has the higher dividend yield at 1.01%, compared with 0.86% for ONEQ.

What is the main difference between FDFF and ONEQ?

FDFF is categorized as Financials Equities, while ONEQ is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FDFF and 0.21% for ONEQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ONEQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.53 vs -0.41), 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.