FELV vs. MGV

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

FELV (Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Value ETF) and MGV (Vanguard Mega Cap Value ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. FELV is actively managed, while MGV is passively managed. Over the past year, FELV returned 35.53% vs 28.72% for MGV. Their correlation of 0.93 means they have usually moved in the same direction. FELV charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.05%/yr for MGV.

Performance

FELV vs. MGV - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FELV achieves a 22.05% return, which is significantly higher than MGV's 16.77% return.

FELV

• 1D: 0.55%
• 1M: 3.27%
• 6M: 17.45%
• YTD: 22.05%
• 1Y: 35.53%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 23.37%

MGV

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: -0.51%
• 6M: 11.22%
• YTD: 16.77%
• 1Y: 28.72%
• 3Y*: 17.69%
• 5Y*: 12.79%
• 10Y*: 12.87%
• ALL TIME*: 9.30%

*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)
FELV Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Value ETF	$7.92M	$7.35M	$6.07M
MGV Vanguard Mega Cap Value ETF	$37.04M	$38.78M	$39.74M

FELV vs. MGV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FELV Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Value ETF	22.05%	15.80%	15.89%	7.49%
MGV Vanguard Mega Cap Value ETF	16.77%	15.45%	16.94%	6.37%

Correlation

The correlation between FELV and MGV is 0.88, 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.	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 2023	0.93

The correlation between FELV and MGV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

FELV vs. MGV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FELV	MGV
Technology	22.0%	18.1%
Financial Services	18.7%	23.1%
Industrials	13.2%	13.8%
Healthcare	11.0%	16.7%
Consumer Cyclical	10.3%	3.8%
Energy	5.4%	5.5%
Consumer Defensive	5.3%	10.7%
Communication Services	4.9%	3.0%
Utilities	3.7%	2.0%
Real Estate	3.1%	1.0%
Basic Materials	2.4%	2.3%

Return for Risk

FELV vs. MGV — Risk / Return Rank

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

FELV

FELV Risk / Return Rank: 95
FELV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
FELV Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
FELV Omega Ratio Rank: 95
FELV Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
FELV Martin Ratio Rank: 95

MGV

MGV Risk / Return Rank: 94
MGV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
MGV Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
MGV Omega Ratio Rank: 93
MGV Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
MGV Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

FELV vs. MGV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	FELV	MGV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.04	2.70	+0.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.18	3.84	+0.34
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.55	1.49	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.96	4.31	+0.65
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	21.67	16.78	+4.89

FELV vs. MGV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FELV Sharpe Ratio is 3.04, which is comparable to the MGV Sharpe Ratio of 2.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FELV and MGV, 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

FELV vs. MGV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FELV drawdown since its inception was -16.08%, smaller than the maximum MGV drawdown of -56.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FELV and MGV.

Drawdown Indicators

	FELV	MGV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.08%	-56.07%	+39.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.85%	-6.42%	-0.43%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-13.18%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-16.54%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.41%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.34%	+1.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.97%	-7.73%	+5.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.57%	1.65%	-0.08%

Volatility

FELV vs. MGV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Value ETF (FELV) is 2.45%, while Vanguard Mega Cap Value ETF (MGV) has a volatility of 2.87%. This indicates that FELV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MGV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FELV	MGV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.45%	2.87%	-0.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.43%	7.85%	+0.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.19%	10.31%	+0.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.31%	13.56%	-0.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.31%	16.30%	-2.99%

FELV vs. MGV - Expense Ratio Comparison

FELV has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is higher than MGV's 0.05% 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. MGV - Dividend Comparison

FELV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.41%, less than MGV's 1.87% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FELV Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Value ETF	1.41%	1.67%	2.02%	0.04%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MGV Vanguard Mega Cap Value ETF	1.87%	2.04%	2.31%	2.48%	2.45%	2.17%	2.47%	2.69%	2.65%	2.34%	2.53%	2.59%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FELV and MGV in my portfolio?

FELV and MGV have a correlation of 0.88, 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 MGV?

MGV has higher volatility (2.87%) compared to FELV (2.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FELV dropped -16.08% vs MGV's -56.07%.

Which ETF is better, FELV or MGV?

On 1-year performance, FELV leads with 35.53% vs 28.72% for MGV. On fees, MGV is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, FELV has been the lower-risk option at 2.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FELV or MGV?

Over the 1-year period, FELV has performed better with a 35.53% return vs 28.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FELV or MGV?

MGV is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for FELV.

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

MGV has the higher dividend yield at 1.87%, compared with 1.41% for FELV.

What is the main difference between FELV and MGV?

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for FELV and 0.05% for MGV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FELV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.04 vs 2.70), 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.