FDIF vs. ILCG
FDIF (Fidelity Disruptors ETF) and ILCG (iShares Morningstar Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. FDIF is actively managed, while ILCG is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FDIF returned 17.19%/yr vs 23.75%/yr for ILCG. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FDIF charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for ILCG.
Performance
FDIF vs. ILCG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FDIF achieves a 8.54% return, which is significantly lower than ILCG's 9.10% return.
FDIF
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 2.32%
- YTD
- 8.54%
- 6M
- 7.24%
- 1Y
- 17.81%
- 3Y*
- 17.19%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ILCG
- 1D
- -0.11%
- 1M
- -1.90%
- YTD
- 9.10%
- 6M
- 7.52%
- 1Y
- 20.09%
- 3Y*
- 23.75%
- 5Y*
- 12.68%
- 10Y*
- 18.09%
FDIF vs. ILCG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FDIF Fidelity Disruptors ETF | 8.54% | 13.83% | 19.74% | 5.83% |
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF | 9.10% | 16.71% | 32.82% | 10.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between FDIF and ILCG is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.88 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 20, 2023 | 0.88 |
The correlation between FDIF and ILCG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.
FDIF vs. ILCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FDIF
ILCG
Technology
Healthcare
Communication Services
Industrials
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Technology
FDIF
ILCG
Healthcare
FDIF
ILCG
Communication Services
FDIF
ILCG
Industrials
FDIF
ILCG
Financial Services
FDIF
ILCG
Consumer Cyclical
FDIF
ILCG
Real Estate
FDIF
ILCG
Basic Materials
FDIF
-
ILCG
Consumer Defensive
FDIF
-
ILCG
Energy
FDIF
-
ILCG
Utilities
FDIF
-
ILCG
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
FDIF vs. ILCG — Risk / Return Rank
FDIF
ILCG
FDIF vs. ILCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Disruptors ETF (FDIF) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG). 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.
| FDIF | ILCG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.15 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.16 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.21 | -0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.21 | 1.29 | -0.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.51 | 4.42 | +0.09 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FDIF vs. ILCG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FDIF drawdown since its inception was -22.63%, smaller than the maximum ILCG drawdown of -52.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDIF and ILCG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FDIF | ILCG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.63% | -52.98% | +30.35% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.80% | -15.65% | +0.85% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.63% | -23.10% | +0.47% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -35.38% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -35.38% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.37% | -5.68% | +3.31% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.81% | -8.21% | +4.40% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.96% | 4.56% | -0.60% |
Volatility
FDIF vs. ILCG - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity Disruptors ETF (FDIF) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) have volatilities of 7.67% and 7.82%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FDIF | ILCG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.67% | 7.82% | -0.15% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.84% | 14.46% | +0.38% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.15% | 17.65% | +0.50% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.86% | 22.22% | -3.36% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.86% | 21.62% | -2.76% |
FDIF vs. ILCG - Expense Ratio Comparison
FDIF has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than ILCG's 0.04% expense ratio.
Dividends
FDIF vs. ILCG - Dividend Comparison
FDIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.27%, less than ILCG's 0.42% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FDIF Fidelity Disruptors ETF | 0.27% | 0.36% | 0.35% | 0.21% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF | 0.42% | 0.47% | 0.50% | 0.69% | 0.75% | 0.34% | 0.28% | 0.54% | 0.81% | 0.89% | 0.95% | 0.99% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FDIF and ILCG have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ILCG has higher volatility (7.82%) compared to FDIF (7.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDIF dropped -22.63% vs ILCG's -52.98%.
On 3-year performance, ILCG leads with 23.75% vs 17.19% for FDIF. On fees, ILCG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, FDIF has been the lower-risk option at 7.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, ILCG has performed better with a 23.75% return vs 17.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ILCG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FDIF.
ILCG has the higher dividend yield at 0.42%, compared with 0.27% for FDIF.
They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FDIF and 0.04% for ILCG.
ILCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.15 vs 0.99), 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 FDIF and ILCG
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