PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FDIS vs. XLF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FDIS vs. XLF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF (FDIS) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FDIS achieves a -1.68% return, which is significantly higher than XLF's -4.62% return. Over the past 10 years, FDIS has outperformed XLF with an annualized return of 13.67%, while XLF has yielded a comparatively lower 12.79% annualized return.


FDIS

1D
0.65%
1M
-3.14%
YTD
-1.68%
6M
-0.61%
1Y
10.04%
3Y*
13.77%
5Y*
5.87%
10Y*
13.67%

XLF

1D
-0.63%
1M
1.42%
YTD
-4.62%
6M
-1.98%
1Y
2.91%
3Y*
18.06%
5Y*
8.47%
10Y*
12.79%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FDIS vs. XLF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FDIS
Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF
-1.68%5.67%24.43%40.48%-35.23%24.25%49.50%27.44%-0.88%22.96%
XLF
State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
-4.62%14.90%30.56%12.03%-10.59%34.80%-1.74%31.88%-13.06%22.00%

Correlation

The correlation between FDIS and XLF is 0.54, 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

0.54

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.58

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.64

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.62

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2013

0.64

The correlation between FDIS and XLF shifts across timeframes, from 0.54 (1 year) to 0.64 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FDIS vs. XLF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FDIS
XLF

Consumer Cyclical

96.9%

-

Consumer Defensive

1.0%

-

Technology

0.9%
1.8%

Industrials

0.8%
0.2%

Communication Services

0.2%

-

Healthcare

0.1%

-

Financial Services

0.1%
98.0%

Real Estate

0.1%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Energy

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

FDIS
96.9%
XLF

-

Consumer Defensive

FDIS
1.0%
XLF

-

Technology

FDIS
0.9%
XLF
1.8%

Industrials

FDIS
0.8%
XLF
0.2%

Communication Services

FDIS
0.2%
XLF

-

Healthcare

FDIS
0.1%
XLF

-

Financial Services

FDIS
0.1%
XLF
98.0%

Real Estate

FDIS
0.1%
XLF

-

Basic Materials

FDIS

-

XLF

-

Energy

FDIS

-

XLF

-

Utilities

FDIS

-

XLF

-

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

FDIS vs. XLF — Risk / Return Rank

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

FDIS
FDIS Risk / Return Rank: 1919
Overall Rank
FDIS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FDIS Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
FDIS Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
FDIS Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
FDIS Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
Martin Ratio Rank

XLF
XLF Risk / Return Rank: 1212
Overall Rank
XLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1212
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 1212
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLF Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
XLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLF Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FDIS vs. XLF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF (FDIS) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF). 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.


FDISXLFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.52

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.10

1.05

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.65

0.20

+0.45

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.02

0.51

+1.51

FDIS vs. XLF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FDIS Sharpe Ratio is 0.55, which is higher than the XLF Sharpe Ratio of 0.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FDIS and XLF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FDISXLFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.55

0.20

+0.35

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.25

0.46

-0.21

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.62

0.58

+0.04

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.60

0.21

+0.40

Drawdowns

FDIS vs. XLF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FDIS drawdown since its inception was -39.16%, smaller than the maximum XLF drawdown of -82.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDIS and XLF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FDISXLFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-39.16%

-82.69%

+43.53%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.50%

-14.79%

-0.71%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.43%

-15.54%

-11.89%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-39.16%

-25.81%

-13.35%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.16%

-42.86%

+3.70%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.20%

-7.38%

+1.18%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.49%

-20.02%

+12.53%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.97%

5.71%

-0.74%

Volatility

FDIS vs. XLF - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF (FDIS) has a higher volatility of 5.35% compared to State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) at 4.20%. This indicates that FDIS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FDISXLFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.35%

4.20%

+1.15%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.18%

11.18%

+2.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.34%

14.61%

+3.73%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

23.89%

18.66%

+5.23%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.31%

22.18%

+0.13%

FDIS vs. XLF - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FDIS and XLF have an expense ratio of 0.08%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

FDIS vs. XLF - Dividend Comparison

FDIS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.74%, less than XLF's 1.52% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FDIS
Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF
0.74%0.75%0.69%0.78%1.00%0.58%0.59%1.14%1.29%1.00%1.62%1.25%
XLF
State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
1.52%1.31%1.42%1.71%2.04%1.63%2.03%1.87%2.08%1.48%21.10%1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions


FDIS and XLF have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FDIS has higher volatility (5.35%) compared to XLF (4.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDIS dropped -39.16% vs XLF's -82.69%.

On 10-year performance, FDIS leads with 13.67% vs 12.79% for XLF. Both ETFs have the same 0.08% expense ratio. On volatility, XLF has been the lower-risk option at 4.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FDIS has performed better with a 13.67% return vs 12.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FDIS and XLF have the same expense ratio: 0.08% per year.

XLF has the higher dividend yield at 1.52%, compared with 0.74% for FDIS.

FDIS is categorized as Consumer Discretionary Equities, while XLF is Financials Equities. FDIS tracks MSCI USA IMI Consumer Discretionary Index, while XLF tracks Financial Select Sector Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and State Street.

FDIS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.55 vs 0.20), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FDIS and XLF

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