FELV vs. FVAL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FELV (Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Value ETF) and FVAL (Fidelity Value Factor ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds from Fidelity. FELV is actively managed, while FVAL is passively managed. Over the past year, FELV returned 29.77% vs 31.42% for FVAL. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FELV charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FVAL.

Performance

FELV vs. FVAL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Value ETF (FELV) and Fidelity Value Factor ETF (FVAL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FELV achieves a 14.72% return, which is significantly higher than FVAL's 11.14% return.

FELV

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 4.99%
• YTD: 14.72%
• 6M: 15.52%
• 1Y: 29.77%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FVAL

• 1D: -0.59%
• 1M: 5.54%
• YTD: 11.14%
• 6M: 12.79%
• 1Y: 31.42%
• 3Y*: 20.96%
• 5Y*: 12.53%
• 10Y*: —

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

FELV vs. FVAL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FELV Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Value ETF	14.72%	15.80%	15.89%	7.19%
FVAL Fidelity Value Factor ETF	11.14%	19.56%	18.05%	6.30%

Correlation

The correlation between FELV and FVAL is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 21, 2023	0.84

The correlation between FELV and FVAL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

FELV vs. FVAL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FELV	FVAL
Technology	19.8%	32.6%
Financial Services	18.4%	11.4%
Industrials	12.5%	8.1%
Healthcare	10.1%	9.3%
Communication Services	8.2%	9.4%
Consumer Cyclical	7.1%	9.9%
Energy	5.8%	4.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.8%	4.3%
Basic Materials	3.8%	1.9%
Utilities	3.4%	1.8%
Real Estate	3.3%	2.4%

Return for Risk

FELV vs. FVAL — Risk / Return Rank

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

FELV

FELV Risk / Return Rank: 84
FELV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
FELV Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
FELV Omega Ratio Rank: 83
FELV Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
FELV Martin Ratio Rank: 87

FVAL

FVAL Risk / Return Rank: 79
FVAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
FVAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
FVAL Omega Ratio Rank: 81
FVAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
FVAL Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

FELV vs. FVAL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Value ETF (FELV) and Fidelity Value Factor ETF (FVAL). 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.

	FELV	FVAL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.79	2.73	+0.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.93	3.78	+0.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.49	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.36	3.54	+0.83
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.85	15.80	+3.05
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FELV vs. FVAL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FELV Sharpe Ratio is 2.79, which is comparable to the FVAL Sharpe Ratio of 2.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FELV and FVAL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FELV	FVAL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.79	2.73	+0.06
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.76	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.65	0.81	+0.84

Drawdowns

FELV vs. FVAL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FELV drawdown since its inception was -16.08%, smaller than the maximum FVAL drawdown of -37.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FELV and FVAL.

Drawdown Indicators

	FELV	FVAL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.08%	-37.26%	+21.18%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.85%	-8.92%	+2.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-18.39%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-23.42%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.75%	+0.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.07%	-4.58%	+2.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.58%	1.99%	-0.41%

Volatility

FELV vs. FVAL - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Value ETF (FELV) and Fidelity Value Factor ETF (FVAL) have volatilities of 2.79% and 2.70%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	FELV	FVAL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.79%	2.70%	+0.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.88%	8.64%	-0.76%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.72%	11.56%	-0.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.40%	16.48%	-3.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.40%	18.11%	-4.71%

FELV vs. FVAL - Expense Ratio Comparison

FELV has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than FVAL's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FELV vs. FVAL - Dividend Comparison

FELV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.51%, more than FVAL's 1.49% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
FELV Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Value ETF	1.51%	1.67%	2.02%	0.04%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FVAL Fidelity Value Factor ETF	1.49%	1.61%	1.60%	1.69%	1.79%	1.41%	1.61%	1.77%	2.06%	1.62%	0.45%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FELV and FVAL in my portfolio?

FELV and FVAL have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FELV or FVAL?

FELV has higher volatility (2.79%) compared to FVAL (2.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FELV dropped -16.08% vs FVAL's -37.26%.

Which ETF is better, FELV or FVAL?

On 1-year performance, FVAL leads with 31.42% vs 29.77% for FELV. On fees, FVAL is cheaper at 0.15% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FELV or FVAL?

Over the 1-year period, FVAL has performed better with a 31.42% return vs 29.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FELV or FVAL?

FVAL is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for FELV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FELV or FVAL?

FELV has the higher dividend yield at 1.51%, compared with 1.49% for FVAL.

What is the main difference between FELV and FVAL?

Their fees differ too: 0.18% for FELV and 0.15% for FVAL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FELV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.79 vs 2.73), 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.