FFLC vs. CNAV

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FFLC (Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF) and CNAV (Mohr Company Nav ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FFLC returned 26.96% vs 72.64% for CNAV. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FFLC charges 0.38%/yr vs 1.31%/yr for CNAV.

Performance

FFLC vs. CNAV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) and Mohr Company Nav ETF (CNAV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FFLC achieves a 10.26% return, which is significantly lower than CNAV's 47.26% return.

FFLC

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: 3.15%
• YTD: 10.26%
• 6M: 11.18%
• 1Y: 26.96%
• 3Y*: 23.20%
• 5Y*: 15.85%
• 10Y*: —

CNAV

• 1D: 1.11%
• 1M: 21.60%
• YTD: 47.26%
• 6M: 48.02%
• 1Y: 72.64%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FFLC vs. CNAV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FFLC Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF	10.26%	17.67%	1.39%
CNAV Mohr Company Nav ETF	47.26%	16.80%	6.34%

Correlation

The correlation between FFLC and CNAV is 0.78, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 2, 2024	0.81

The correlation between FFLC and CNAV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FFLC vs. CNAV — Risk / Return Rank

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

FFLC

FFLC Risk / Return Rank: 61
FFLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
FFLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
FFLC Omega Ratio Rank: 61
FFLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
FFLC Martin Ratio Rank: 66

CNAV

CNAV Risk / Return Rank: 87
CNAV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
CNAV Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
CNAV Omega Ratio Rank: 81
CNAV Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
CNAV Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

FFLC vs. CNAV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) and Mohr Company Nav ETF (CNAV). 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.

	FFLC	CNAV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.12	2.91	-0.80
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.90	3.62	-0.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.48	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.71	5.63	-2.91
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.30	24.09	-11.79
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FFLC vs. CNAV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FFLC Sharpe Ratio is 2.12, which is comparable to the CNAV Sharpe Ratio of 2.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FFLC and CNAV, 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

	FFLC	CNAV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.12	2.91	-0.80
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.17	1.62	-0.45

Drawdowns

FFLC vs. CNAV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FFLC drawdown since its inception was -19.72%, smaller than the maximum CNAV drawdown of -30.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFLC and CNAV.

Drawdown Indicators

	FFLC	CNAV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.72%	-30.06%	+10.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.98%	-12.97%	+2.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.72%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.72%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.68%	0.00%	-0.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.99%	-5.42%	+2.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.20%	3.02%	-0.82%

Volatility

FFLC vs. CNAV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) is 3.15%, while Mohr Company Nav ETF (CNAV) has a volatility of 12.28%. This indicates that FFLC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNAV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FFLC	CNAV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.15%	12.28%	-9.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.73%	21.02%	-11.29%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.80%	25.08%	-12.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.92%	27.16%	-10.24%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.65%	27.16%	-9.51%

FFLC vs. CNAV - Expense Ratio Comparison

FFLC has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is lower than CNAV's 1.31% expense ratio.

Dividends

FFLC vs. CNAV - Dividend Comparison

FFLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.00%, while CNAV has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CNAV Mohr Company Nav ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FFLC Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF	1.00%	1.10%	0.82%	0.57%	1.67%	1.68%	0.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FFLC and CNAV in my portfolio?

FFLC and CNAV have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FFLC or CNAV?

CNAV has higher volatility (12.28%) compared to FFLC (3.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFLC dropped -19.72% vs CNAV's -30.06%.

Which ETF is better, FFLC or CNAV?

On 1-year performance, CNAV leads with 72.64% vs 26.96% for FFLC. On fees, FFLC is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, FFLC has been the lower-risk option at 3.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FFLC or CNAV?

Over the 1-year period, CNAV has performed better with a 72.64% return vs 26.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FFLC or CNAV?

FFLC is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 1.31% for CNAV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FFLC or CNAV?

FFLC has the higher dividend yield at 1.00%, compared with 0.00% for CNAV.

What is the main difference between FFLC and CNAV?

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Mohr. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for FFLC and 1.31% for CNAV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CNAV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.91 vs 2.12), 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.