FELG vs. AUSF

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FELG (Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF) and AUSF (Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FELG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while AUSF is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Adaptive Wealth Strategies U.S. Factor Index. FELG is actively managed, while AUSF is passively managed. Over the past year, FELG returned 20.00% vs 14.03% for AUSF. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FELG charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.27%/yr for AUSF.

Performance

FELG vs. AUSF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG) and Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF (AUSF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FELG achieves a 2.26% return, which is significantly lower than AUSF's 6.60% return.

FELG

• 1D: -1.73%
• 1M: -3.56%
• YTD: 2.26%
• 6M: 0.98%
• 1Y: 20.00%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AUSF

• 1D: 0.81%
• 1M: -1.45%
• YTD: 6.60%
• 6M: 5.99%
• 1Y: 14.03%
• 3Y*: 19.79%
• 5Y*: 13.36%
• 10Y*: —

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

FELG vs. AUSF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FELG Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF	2.26%	18.44%	35.45%	4.37%
AUSF Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF	6.60%	13.69%	16.05%	9.15%

Correlation

The correlation between FELG and AUSF is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.19
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 2023	0.34

The correlation between FELG and AUSF shifts across timeframes, from 0.19 (1 year) to 0.34 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FELG vs. AUSF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FELG	AUSF
Technology	54.2%	15.3%
Communication Services	12.2%	8.6%
Consumer Cyclical	11.4%	9.3%
Healthcare	7.0%	11.4%
Industrials	6.1%	14.4%
Financial Services	4.4%	18.4%
Consumer Defensive	1.3%	7.8%
Utilities	1.0%	4.4%
Energy	0.7%	3.2%
Real Estate	0.1%	4.6%
Basic Materials	0.0%	2.6%

Return for Risk

FELG vs. AUSF — Risk / Return Rank

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

FELG

FELG Risk / Return Rank: 32
FELG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
FELG Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
FELG Omega Ratio Rank: 34
FELG Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
FELG Martin Ratio Rank: 30

AUSF

AUSF Risk / Return Rank: 43
AUSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
AUSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
AUSF Omega Ratio Rank: 37
AUSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
AUSF Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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.

FELG vs. AUSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG) and Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF (AUSF). 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.

	FELG	AUSF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.24	1.38	-0.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.73	1.99	-0.26
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.24	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.24	2.41	-1.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.14	6.87	-2.73

FELG vs. AUSF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FELG Sharpe Ratio is 1.24, which is comparable to the AUSF Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FELG and AUSF, 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

FELG vs. AUSF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FELG drawdown since its inception was -23.89%, smaller than the maximum AUSF drawdown of -44.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FELG and AUSF.

Drawdown Indicators

	FELG	AUSF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.89%	-44.25%	+20.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.17%	-5.84%	-10.33%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-12.29%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-14.23%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.32%	-2.45%	-3.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.54%	-4.20%	+0.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.84%	2.05%	+2.79%

Volatility

FELG vs. AUSF - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG) has a higher volatility of 6.15% compared to Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF (AUSF) at 3.02%. This indicates that FELG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AUSF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FELG	AUSF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.15%	3.02%	+3.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.66%	6.95%	+5.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.29%	10.27%	+6.02%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.00%	13.63%	+6.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.00%	19.03%	+0.97%

FELG vs. AUSF - Expense Ratio Comparison

FELG has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than AUSF's 0.27% 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

FELG vs. AUSF - Dividend Comparison

FELG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.36%, less than AUSF's 2.76% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
AUSF Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF	2.76%	2.78%	2.63%	1.83%	2.51%	2.22%	2.95%	4.02%	1.46%
FELG Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF	0.36%	0.38%	0.44%	0.11%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FELG and AUSF in my portfolio?

FELG and AUSF have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FELG or AUSF?

FELG has higher volatility (6.15%) compared to AUSF (3.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FELG dropped -23.89% vs AUSF's -44.25%.

Which ETF is better, FELG or AUSF?

On 1-year performance, FELG leads with 20.00% vs 14.03% for AUSF. On fees, FELG is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, AUSF has been the lower-risk option at 3.02%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FELG or AUSF?

Over the 1-year period, FELG has performed better with a 20.00% return vs 14.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FELG or AUSF?

FELG is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.27% for AUSF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FELG or AUSF?

AUSF has the higher dividend yield at 2.76%, compared with 0.36% for FELG.

What is the main difference between FELG and AUSF?

FELG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while AUSF is Mid Cap Value Equities. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for FELG and 0.27% for AUSF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AUSF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.38 vs 1.24), 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.