PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
FEMG vs. IWR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

FEMG vs. IWR

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

FEMG (Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap Growth ETF) and IWR (iShares Russell Midcap ETF) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds. FEMG is actively managed, while IWR is passively managed. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FEMG charges 0.23%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWR.

Performance

FEMG vs. IWR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap Growth ETF (FEMG) and iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

FEMG

1D
0.82%
1M
1.31%
YTD
—
6M
—
1Y
—
3Y*
—
5Y*
—
10Y*
—

IWR

1D
0.67%
1M
2.77%
YTD
13.37%
6M
11.57%
1Y
20.37%
3Y*
17.19%
5Y*
7.88%
10Y*
11.97%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FEMG vs. IWR - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)
FEMG
Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap Growth ETF		3.75%
IWR
iShares Russell Midcap ETF		6.23%

Correlation

The correlation between FEMG and IWR is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 30, 2026

0.82

FEMG vs. IWR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
FEMG
IWR

Industrials

27.7%
18.1%

Technology

22.4%
19.6%

Consumer Cyclical

18.1%
11.1%

Healthcare

12.1%
8.7%

Financial Services

6.5%
12.1%

Energy

3.7%
6.5%

Utilities

2.7%
5.7%

Communication Services

2.7%
3.3%

Consumer Defensive

1.7%
3.9%

Real Estate

1.6%
6.8%

Basic Materials

0.6%
4.2%

Industrials

FEMG
27.7%
IWR
18.1%

Technology

FEMG
22.4%
IWR
19.6%

Consumer Cyclical

FEMG
18.1%
IWR
11.1%

Healthcare

FEMG
12.1%
IWR
8.7%

Financial Services

FEMG
6.5%
IWR
12.1%

Energy

FEMG
3.7%
IWR
6.5%

Utilities

FEMG
2.7%
IWR
5.7%

Communication Services

FEMG
2.7%
IWR
3.3%

Consumer Defensive

FEMG
1.7%
IWR
3.9%

Real Estate

FEMG
1.6%
IWR
6.8%

Basic Materials

FEMG
0.6%
IWR
4.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap Growth ETF

iShares Russell Midcap ETF

Often compared with FEMG:
FEMG vs. PAMCFEMG vs. BCSMFEMG vs. NBSMFEMG vs. MDYGFEMG vs. KOMPFEMG vs. JHMMFEMG vs. FELG
Often compared with IWR:
IWR vs. VOIWR vs. IWDIWR vs. SPMDIWR vs. IWNIWR vs. SCHMIWR vs. VXFIWR vs. REGL

Return for Risk

FEMG vs. IWR — Risk / Return Rank

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

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

IWR
IWR Risk / Return Rank: 5151
Overall Rank
IWR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IWR Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
IWR Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
IWR Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
IWR Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FEMG vs. IWR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap Growth ETF (FEMG) and iShares Russell Midcap ETF (IWR). 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.

FEMGIWRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

—

1.49

—

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

—

2.14

—

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

—

1.26

—

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

—

2.51

—

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

—

9.58

—

FEMG vs. IWR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

Loading charts...

Drawdowns

FEMG vs. IWR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEMG drawdown since its inception was -4.66%, smaller than the maximum IWR drawdown of -58.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEMG and IWR.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

FEMGIWRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-4.66%

-58.78%

+54.12%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

—

-8.17%

—

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

—

-21.09%

—

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

—

-26.18%

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-40.59%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.89%

-0.80%

-1.09%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.37%

-7.79%

+6.42%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

—

2.13%

—

Volatility

FEMG vs. IWR - Volatility Comparison

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

FEMGIWRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

—

4.58%

—

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

—

10.46%

—

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.54%

13.82%

+2.72%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.54%

18.29%

-1.75%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.54%

19.36%

-2.82%

FEMG vs. IWR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEMG has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is higher than IWR's 0.19% 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

FEMG vs. IWR - Dividend Comparison

FEMG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.10%, less than IWR's 1.17% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FEMG
Fidelity Enhanced Mid Cap Growth ETF		0.10%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
IWR
iShares Russell Midcap ETF		1.17%1.29%1.27%1.43%1.59%1.04%1.28%1.43%1.98%1.52%1.72%1.59%

Frequently Asked Questions

FEMG and IWR have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, IWR is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

IWR is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.23% for FEMG.

IWR has the higher dividend yield at 1.17%, compared with 0.10% for FEMG.

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for FEMG and 0.19% for IWR.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FEMG and IWR

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