FDFF vs. XMMO
FDFF (Fidelity Disruptive Finance ETF) and XMMO (Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FDFF is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while XMMO is a Momentum fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Momentum Index. FDFF is actively managed, while XMMO is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FDFF returned 11.88%/yr vs 24.75%/yr for XMMO. Their 0.67 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. FDFF charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for XMMO.
Performance
FDFF vs. XMMO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FDFF achieves a 2.08% return, which is significantly lower than XMMO's 13.32% return.
FDFF
- 1D
- 1.66%
- 1M
- 5.14%
- 6M
- 3.96%
- YTD
- 2.08%
- 1Y
- -1.80%
- 3Y*
- 11.88%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 13.28%
XMMO
- 1D
- 1.37%
- 1M
- -4.13%
- 6M
- 10.87%
- YTD
- 13.32%
- 1Y
- 22.21%
- 3Y*
- 24.75%
- 5Y*
- 13.53%
- 10Y*
- 18.17%
- ALL TIME*
- 12.18%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $136.84K | $154.95K | $132.20K | |
| $60.28M | $71.43M | $67.26M |
FDFF vs. XMMO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FDFF Fidelity Disruptive Finance ETF | 2.08% | -2.75% | 27.86% | 16.58% |
XMMO Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF | 13.32% | 13.04% | 38.03% | 17.43% |
Correlation
The correlation between FDFF and XMMO is 0.44, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.44 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.66 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 12, 2023 | 0.67 |
Over the past year, the correlation between FDFF and XMMO has dropped to 0.44 - well below their long-term average of 0.67, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
FDFF vs. XMMO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FDFF
XMMO
Financial Services
Technology
Industrials
Real Estate
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
FDFF
XMMO
Technology
FDFF
XMMO
Industrials
FDFF
XMMO
Real Estate
FDFF
XMMO
Consumer Cyclical
FDFF
XMMO
Basic Materials
FDFF
-
XMMO
Communication Services
FDFF
-
XMMO
Consumer Defensive
FDFF
-
XMMO
Energy
FDFF
-
XMMO
Healthcare
FDFF
-
XMMO
Utilities
FDFF
-
XMMO
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. XMMO — Risk / Return Rank
FDFF
XMMO
FDFF vs. XMMO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Disruptive Finance ETF (FDFF) and Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO). 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 | XMMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.14 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.54 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.19 | -0.19 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.09 | 1.60 | -1.69 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.18 | 6.64 | -6.82 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FDFF vs. XMMO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FDFF drawdown since its inception was -23.06%, smaller than the maximum XMMO drawdown of -55.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDFF and XMMO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FDFF | XMMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.06% | -55.37% | +32.31% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -20.60% | -13.91% | -6.69% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.06% | -24.93% | +1.87% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -27.91% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -36.74% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.30% | -10.02% | +2.72% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.66% | -9.42% | +2.76% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.26% | 3.35% | +6.91% |
Volatility
FDFF vs. XMMO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Fidelity Disruptive Finance ETF (FDFF) is 4.86%, while Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO) has a volatility of 7.91%. This indicates that FDFF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XMMO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FDFF | XMMO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.86% | 7.91% | -3.05% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.88% | 18.48% | -3.60% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.62% | 21.51% | -2.89% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.95% | 21.87% | -2.92% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.95% | 22.44% | -3.49% |
FDFF vs. XMMO - Expense Ratio Comparison
FDFF has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than XMMO's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
FDFF vs. XMMO - Dividend Comparison
FDFF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.97%, more than XMMO's 0.62% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FDFF Fidelity Disruptive Finance ETF | 0.97% | 0.86% | 0.70% | 0.27% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XMMO Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF | 0.62% | 0.78% | 0.34% | 0.80% | 1.43% | 0.41% | 0.61% | 0.60% | 0.19% | 0.21% | 0.22% | 0.64% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FDFF and XMMO have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XMMO has higher volatility (7.91%) compared to FDFF (4.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDFF dropped -23.06% vs XMMO's -55.37%.
On 3-year performance, XMMO leads with 24.75% vs 11.88% for FDFF. On fees, XMMO is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, FDFF has been the lower-risk option at 4.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, XMMO has performed better with a 24.75% return vs 11.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XMMO is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FDFF.
FDFF has the higher dividend yield at 0.97%, compared with 0.62% for XMMO.
FDFF is categorized as Financials Equities, while XMMO is Momentum. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FDFF and 0.35% for XMMO.
XMMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.04 vs -0.10), 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 XMMO
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