FEAC vs. ONEQ

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

FEAC (Fidelity Enhanced U.S. All-Cap Equity ETF) and ONEQ (Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FEAC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while ONEQ is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Composite Index. FEAC is actively managed, while ONEQ is passively managed. Over the past year, FEAC returned 26.82% vs 26.91% for ONEQ. Their correlation of 0.93 means they have usually moved in the same direction. FEAC charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.21%/yr for ONEQ.

Performance

FEAC vs. ONEQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Enhanced U.S. All-Cap Equity ETF (FEAC) and Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF (ONEQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEAC achieves a 13.75% return, which is significantly higher than ONEQ's 12.39% return.

FEAC

• 1D: 1.27%
• 1M: 2.23%
• 6M: 11.74%
• YTD: 13.75%
• 1Y: 26.82%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 17.62%

ONEQ

• 1D: 2.04%
• 1M: 0.40%
• 6M: 10.70%
• YTD: 12.39%
• 1Y: 26.91%
• 3Y*: 24.22%
• 5Y*: 13.06%
• 10Y*: 18.60%
• ALL TIME*: 13.40%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FEAC Fidelity Enhanced U.S. All-Cap Equity ETF	$171.42K	$651.35K	$554.45K
ONEQ Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF	$34.83M	$32.03M	$39.48M

FEAC vs. ONEQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FEAC Fidelity Enhanced U.S. All-Cap Equity ETF	13.75%	18.01%	-1.87%
ONEQ Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF	12.39%	20.89%	1.83%

Correlation

The correlation between FEAC and ONEQ is 0.93, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 21, 2024	0.93

The correlation between FEAC and ONEQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FEAC vs. ONEQ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FEAC

FEAC Risk / Return Rank: 82
FEAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
FEAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
FEAC Omega Ratio Rank: 80
FEAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
FEAC Martin Ratio Rank: 87

ONEQ

ONEQ Risk / Return Rank: 60
ONEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
ONEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
ONEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 58
ONEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
ONEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 58

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FEAC vs. ONEQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Enhanced U.S. All-Cap Equity ETF (FEAC) and Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF (ONEQ). 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.

	FEAC	ONEQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.00	1.48	+0.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.71	2.06	+0.64
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.26	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.31	2.14	+1.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.49	7.14	+6.34

FEAC vs. ONEQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEAC Sharpe Ratio is 2.00, which is higher than the ONEQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEAC and ONEQ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FEAC vs. ONEQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEAC drawdown since its inception was -18.96%, smaller than the maximum ONEQ drawdown of -55.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEAC and ONEQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	FEAC	ONEQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.96%	-55.09%	+36.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.15%	-12.64%	+4.49%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-24.09%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.23%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.23%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-4.07%	+4.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.45%	-7.93%	+5.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.99%	3.78%	-1.79%

Volatility

FEAC vs. ONEQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Enhanced U.S. All-Cap Equity ETF (FEAC) is 3.54%, while Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF (ONEQ) has a volatility of 6.04%. This indicates that FEAC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ONEQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FEAC	ONEQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.54%	6.04%	-2.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.47%	14.67%	-4.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.48%	18.27%	-4.79%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.30%	22.50%	-5.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.30%	21.83%	-4.53%

FEAC vs. ONEQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEAC has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than ONEQ's 0.21% 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%.

Dividends

FEAC vs. ONEQ - Dividend Comparison

FEAC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.76%, less than ONEQ's 0.86% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FEAC Fidelity Enhanced U.S. All-Cap Equity ETF	0.76%	0.94%	0.12%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ONEQ Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF	0.86%	0.54%	0.65%	0.71%	0.97%	0.54%	0.71%	2.51%	1.08%	0.84%	1.12%	1.04%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FEAC and ONEQ in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, FEAC and ONEQ move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, FEAC or ONEQ?

ONEQ has higher volatility (6.04%) compared to FEAC (3.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEAC dropped -18.96% vs ONEQ's -55.09%.

Which ETF is better, FEAC or ONEQ?

On 1-year performance, ONEQ leads with 26.91% vs 26.82% for FEAC. On fees, FEAC is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, FEAC has been the lower-risk option at 3.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FEAC or ONEQ?

Over the 1-year period, ONEQ has performed better with a 26.91% return vs 26.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FEAC or ONEQ?

FEAC is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.21% for ONEQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FEAC or ONEQ?

ONEQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.86%, compared with 0.76% for FEAC.

What is the main difference between FEAC and ONEQ?

FEAC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while ONEQ is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for FEAC and 0.21% for ONEQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FEAC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.00 vs 1.48), 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.