FDIF vs. OUSA
FDIF (Fidelity Disruptors ETF) and OUSA (OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FDIF is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while OUSA is a Quality Factor fund tracking the O'Shares US Quality Dividend Index. FDIF is actively managed, while OUSA is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FDIF returned 17.31%/yr vs 13.56%/yr for OUSA. Their 0.59 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. FDIF charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.48%/yr for OUSA.
Performance
FDIF vs. OUSA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FDIF achieves a 10.35% return, which is significantly higher than OUSA's 7.09% return.
FDIF
- 1D
- 1.84%
- 1M
- -1.55%
- 6M
- 10.40%
- YTD
- 10.35%
- 1Y
- 17.89%
- 3Y*
- 17.31%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 16.06%
OUSA
- 1D
- 0.53%
- 1M
- 2.40%
- 6M
- 3.84%
- YTD
- 7.09%
- 1Y
- 16.21%
- 3Y*
- 13.56%
- 5Y*
- 8.96%
- 10Y*
- 10.40%
- ALL TIME*
- 10.73%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $145.35K | $621.28K | $330.03K | |
| $872.37K | $1.31M | $1.44M |
FDIF vs. OUSA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FDIF Fidelity Disruptors ETF | 10.35% | 13.83% | 19.74% | 5.83% |
OUSA OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF | 7.09% | 10.23% | 17.09% | 6.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between FDIF and OUSA is 0.40, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.40 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.58 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 20, 2023 | 0.59 |
The correlation between FDIF and OUSA shifts across timeframes, from 0.40 (1 year) to 0.59 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
FDIF vs. OUSA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FDIF
OUSA
Technology
Healthcare
Communication Services
Industrials
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Technology
FDIF
OUSA
Healthcare
FDIF
OUSA
Communication Services
FDIF
OUSA
Industrials
FDIF
OUSA
Financial Services
FDIF
OUSA
Consumer Cyclical
FDIF
OUSA
Real Estate
FDIF
OUSA
-
Basic Materials
FDIF
-
OUSA
-
Consumer Defensive
FDIF
-
OUSA
Energy
FDIF
-
OUSA
-
Utilities
FDIF
-
OUSA
-
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. OUSA — Risk / Return Rank
FDIF
OUSA
FDIF vs. OUSA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Disruptors ETF (FDIF) and OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF (OUSA). 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 | OUSA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.63 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.99 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 1.28 | -0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.21 | 1.95 | -0.73 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.36 | 6.80 | -2.44 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FDIF vs. OUSA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FDIF drawdown since its inception was -22.63%, smaller than the maximum OUSA drawdown of -33.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDIF and OUSA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FDIF | OUSA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.63% | -33.12% | +10.49% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.80% | -8.36% | -6.44% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.63% | -13.14% | -9.49% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -19.54% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.12% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.93% | -0.23% | -2.70% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.78% | -3.50% | -0.28% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.12% | 2.39% | +1.73% |
Volatility
FDIF vs. OUSA - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity Disruptors ETF (FDIF) has a higher volatility of 5.73% compared to OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF (OUSA) at 3.65%. This indicates that FDIF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than OUSA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FDIF | OUSA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.73% | 3.65% | +2.08% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.56% | 8.12% | +7.44% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.79% | 10.25% | +8.54% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.87% | 13.38% | +5.49% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.87% | 15.19% | +3.68% |
FDIF vs. OUSA - Expense Ratio Comparison
FDIF has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than OUSA's 0.48% expense ratio.
Dividends
FDIF vs. OUSA - Dividend Comparison
FDIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.26%, less than OUSA's 1.35% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FDIF Fidelity Disruptors ETF | 0.26% | 0.36% | 0.35% | 0.21% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
OUSA OShares U.S. Quality Dividend ETF | 1.35% | 1.39% | 1.50% | 1.81% | 1.92% | 1.56% | 2.03% | 2.31% | 3.06% | 2.15% | 2.32% | 1.17% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FDIF and OUSA have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FDIF has higher volatility (5.73%) compared to OUSA (3.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDIF dropped -22.63% vs OUSA's -33.12%.
On 3-year performance, FDIF leads with 17.31% vs 13.56% for OUSA. On fees, OUSA is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, OUSA has been the lower-risk option at 3.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, FDIF has performed better with a 17.31% return vs 13.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
OUSA is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FDIF.
OUSA has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 0.26% for FDIF.
FDIF is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while OUSA is Quality Factor. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and O'Shares Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FDIF and 0.48% for OUSA.
OUSA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.59 vs 0.96), 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 OUSA
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