PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FFLC vs. GRPM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FFLC vs. GRPM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) and Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF (GRPM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FFLC achieves a 10.97% return, which is significantly higher than GRPM's 10.42% return.


FFLC

1D
1.03%
1M
-0.76%
6M
10.76%
YTD
10.97%
1Y
20.01%
3Y*
21.11%
5Y*
16.87%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
20.32%

GRPM

1D
-0.12%
1M
3.96%
6M
8.89%
YTD
10.42%
1Y
19.46%
3Y*
13.07%
5Y*
9.22%
10Y*
10.95%
ALL TIME*
11.32%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FFLC vs. GRPM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
FFLC
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF
10.97%17.67%27.89%25.07%-0.04%24.53%19.50%
GRPM
Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF
10.42%7.81%15.67%18.79%-11.63%26.35%27.99%

Correlation

The correlation between FFLC and GRPM is 0.62, 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

0.62

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.71

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.80

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020

0.82

Over the past year, the correlation between FFLC and GRPM has dropped to 0.62 - well below their long-term average of 0.82, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

FFLC vs. GRPM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FFLC
GRPM

Technology

31.2%
20.8%

Financial Services

12.1%
23.3%

Industrials

11.7%
12.3%

Communication Services

11.3%

-

Consumer Cyclical

10.3%
13.1%

Healthcare

8.6%
19.0%

Energy

4.3%
5.0%

Consumer Defensive

3.9%
2.6%

Basic Materials

2.0%
3.8%

Utilities

1.4%

-

Real Estate

1.1%

-

Technology

FFLC
31.2%
GRPM
20.8%

Financial Services

FFLC
12.1%
GRPM
23.3%

Industrials

FFLC
11.7%
GRPM
12.3%

Communication Services

FFLC
11.3%
GRPM

-

Consumer Cyclical

FFLC
10.3%
GRPM
13.1%

Healthcare

FFLC
8.6%
GRPM
19.0%

Energy

FFLC
4.3%
GRPM
5.0%

Consumer Defensive

FFLC
3.9%
GRPM
2.6%

Basic Materials

FFLC
2.0%
GRPM
3.8%

Utilities

FFLC
1.4%
GRPM

-

Real Estate

FFLC
1.1%
GRPM

-

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

FFLC vs. GRPM — Risk / Return Rank

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

FFLC
FFLC Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
FFLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FFLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
FFLC Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
FFLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
FFLC Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
Martin Ratio Rank

GRPM
GRPM Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
GRPM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4747
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GRPM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
GRPM Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
GRPM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
GRPM Martin Ratio Rank: 5959
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.

FFLC vs. GRPM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) and Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF (GRPM). 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.


FFLCGRPMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.22

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.19

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.22

+0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.01

2.57

-0.55

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.84

7.52

+1.32

FFLC vs. GRPM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FFLC Sharpe Ratio is 1.47, which is comparable to the GRPM Sharpe Ratio of 1.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FFLC and GRPM, 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

FFLC vs. GRPM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FFLC drawdown since its inception was -19.72%, smaller than the maximum GRPM drawdown of -43.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFLC and GRPM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FFLCGRPMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.72%

-43.12%

+23.40%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.98%

-7.62%

-2.36%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.72%

-28.09%

+8.37%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.72%

-28.09%

+8.37%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-43.12%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.89%

-1.10%

+0.21%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.95%

-5.67%

+2.72%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.27%

2.59%

-0.32%

Volatility

FFLC vs. GRPM - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) has a higher volatility of 3.77% compared to Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF (GRPM) at 3.28%. This indicates that FFLC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GRPM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FFLCGRPMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.77%

3.28%

+0.49%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.92%

10.47%

+0.45%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.69%

15.73%

-2.04%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.91%

20.78%

-3.87%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.62%

22.18%

-4.56%

FFLC vs. GRPM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FFLC has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is higher than GRPM's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

FFLC vs. GRPM - Dividend Comparison

FFLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.99%, more than GRPM's 0.72% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FFLC
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF
0.99%1.10%0.82%0.57%1.67%1.68%0.89%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
GRPM
Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF
0.72%1.19%0.95%0.96%1.28%0.92%1.16%1.25%1.50%1.14%1.00%1.43%

Frequently Asked Questions


FFLC and GRPM have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FFLC has higher volatility (3.77%) compared to GRPM (3.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFLC dropped -19.72% vs GRPM's -43.12%.

On 5-year performance, FFLC leads with 16.87% vs 9.22% for GRPM. On fees, GRPM is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, GRPM has been the lower-risk option at 3.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FFLC has performed better with a 16.87% return vs 9.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GRPM is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for FFLC.

FFLC has the higher dividend yield at 0.99%, compared with 0.72% for GRPM.

FFLC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while GRPM is Mid Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for FFLC and 0.35% for GRPM.

FFLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.47 vs 1.25), 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 FFLC and GRPM

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