PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FELG vs. AUSF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

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.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FELG achieves a 4.21% return, which is significantly lower than AUSF's 13.25% return.


FELG

1D
1.95%
1M
0.86%
6M
5.50%
YTD
4.21%
1Y
16.43%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
22.87%

AUSF

1D
0.58%
1M
3.89%
6M
7.66%
YTD
13.25%
1Y
20.82%
3Y*
19.83%
5Y*
14.70%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
12.77%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$2.41M$2.26M$3.94M
$14.74M$13.52M$19.60M

FELG vs. AUSF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
FELG
Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF
4.21%18.44%35.45%4.37%
AUSF
Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF
13.25%13.69%16.05%9.15%

Correlation

The correlation between FELG and AUSF is 0.09, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.09

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 2023

0.30

Over the past year, the correlation between FELG and AUSF has dropped to 0.09 - well below their long-term average of 0.30, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

FELG vs. AUSF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FELG
AUSF

Technology

55.9%
15.7%

Communication Services

14.7%
6.6%

Consumer Cyclical

8.6%
8.8%

Industrials

8.4%
13.4%

Healthcare

5.7%
12.3%

Financial Services

4.6%
20.1%

Utilities

1.2%
4.5%

Consumer Defensive

1.2%
7.9%

Energy

0.7%
3.3%

Basic Materials

0.1%
2.5%

Real Estate

0.1%
4.3%

Technology

FELG
55.9%
AUSF
15.7%

Communication Services

FELG
14.7%
AUSF
6.6%

Consumer Cyclical

FELG
8.6%
AUSF
8.8%

Industrials

FELG
8.4%
AUSF
13.4%

Healthcare

FELG
5.7%
AUSF
12.3%

Financial Services

FELG
4.6%
AUSF
20.1%

Utilities

FELG
1.2%
AUSF
4.5%

Consumer Defensive

FELG
1.2%
AUSF
7.9%

Energy

FELG
0.7%
AUSF
3.3%

Basic Materials

FELG
0.1%
AUSF
2.5%

Real Estate

FELG
0.1%
AUSF
4.3%

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

FELG vs. AUSF — Risk / Return Rank

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

FELG
FELG Risk / Return Rank: 3535
Overall Rank
FELG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FELG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
FELG Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
FELG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
FELG Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
Martin Ratio Rank

AUSF
AUSF Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
AUSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AUSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
AUSF Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
AUSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
AUSF Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

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.


FELGAUSFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.53

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.17

1.35

-0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.02

3.58

-2.56

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.17

10.47

-7.30

FELG vs. AUSF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FELG Sharpe Ratio is 0.96, which is lower than the AUSF Sharpe Ratio of 2.01. 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.


Loading charts...

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.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FELGAUSFDifference

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

-4.54%

-1.05%

-3.49%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.62%

-4.15%

+0.53%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.20%

1.99%

+3.21%

Volatility

FELG vs. AUSF - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG) has a higher volatility of 6.31% compared to Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF (AUSF) at 3.58%. 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FELGAUSFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.31%

3.58%

+2.73%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.86%

7.47%

+6.39%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.29%

10.42%

+6.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.04%

13.62%

+6.42%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.04%

18.96%

+1.08%

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 2.60% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
AUSF
Global X Adaptive U.S. Factor ETF
2.60%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


FELG and AUSF have a correlation of 0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FELG has higher volatility (6.31%) compared to AUSF (3.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FELG dropped -23.89% vs AUSF's -44.25%.

On 1-year performance, AUSF leads with 20.82% vs 16.43% for FELG. On fees, FELG is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, AUSF has been the lower-risk option at 3.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, AUSF has performed better with a 20.82% return vs 16.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

AUSF has the higher dividend yield at 2.60%, compared with 0.36% for FELG.

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.

AUSF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.01 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FELG and AUSF

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