FDIS vs. VGT
Compare and contrast key facts about Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF (FDIS) and Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT).
FDIS and VGT are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. FDIS is a passively managed fund by Fidelity that tracks the performance of the MSCI USA IMI Consumer Discretionary Index. It was launched on Oct 21, 2013. VGT is a passively managed fund by Vanguard that tracks the performance of the MSCI US Investable Market Information Technology 25/50 Index. It was launched on Jan 26, 2004. Both FDIS and VGT are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: FDIS or VGT.
Key characteristics
| FDIS | VGT | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 21.83% | 28.88% |
| 1Y Return | 32.31% | 37.56% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 3.05% | 12.24% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 16.54% | 22.70% |
| 10Y Return (Ann) | 14.25% | 20.89% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 2.09 | 1.95 |
| Sortino Ratio | 2.83 | 2.51 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.36 | 1.35 |
| Calmar Ratio | 1.84 | 2.69 |
| Martin Ratio | 10.65 | 9.68 |
| Ulcer Index | 3.48% | 4.22% |
| Daily Std Dev | 17.73% | 20.95% |
| Max Drawdown | -39.16% | -54.63% |
| Current Drawdown | -0.63% | -0.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between FDIS and VGT is 0.79, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
FDIS vs. VGT - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, FDIS achieves a 21.83% return, which is significantly lower than VGT's 28.88% return. Over the past 10 years, FDIS has underperformed VGT with an annualized return of 14.25%, while VGT has yielded a comparatively higher 20.89% annualized return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
FDIS vs. VGT - Expense Ratio Comparison
FDIS has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than VGT's 0.10% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
FDIS vs. VGT - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF (FDIS) and Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT). 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.
Dividends
FDIS vs. VGT - Dividend Comparison
FDIS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.69%, more than VGT's 0.60% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FDIS Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF | 0.69% | 0.78% | 1.00% | 0.58% | 0.59% | 1.14% | 1.29% | 1.00% | 1.62% | 1.25% | 1.01% | 0.28% |
VGT Vanguard Information Technology ETF | 0.60% | 0.65% | 0.91% | 0.64% | 0.82% | 1.11% | 1.29% | 0.99% | 1.31% | 1.28% | 1.12% | 1.05% |
Drawdowns
FDIS vs. VGT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FDIS drawdown since its inception was -39.16%, smaller than the maximum VGT drawdown of -54.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDIS and VGT. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
FDIS vs. VGT - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF (FDIS) and Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT) have volatilities of 6.01% and 5.97%, 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.