FFLC vs. GRPM
FFLC (Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF) and GRPM (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FFLC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while GRPM is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400® GARP Index. FFLC is actively managed, while GRPM is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FFLC returned 16.87%/yr vs 9.22%/yr for GRPM. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FFLC charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for GRPM.
Performance
FFLC vs. GRPM - Performance Comparison
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%
FFLC vs. GRPM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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
Financial Services
Industrials
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Utilities
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
FFLC
GRPM
Financial Services
FFLC
GRPM
Industrials
FFLC
GRPM
Communication Services
FFLC
GRPM
-
Consumer Cyclical
FFLC
GRPM
Healthcare
FFLC
GRPM
Energy
FFLC
GRPM
Consumer Defensive
FFLC
GRPM
Basic Materials
FFLC
GRPM
Utilities
FFLC
GRPM
-
Real Estate
FFLC
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
FFLC
GRPM
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.
| FFLC | GRPM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
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
| FFLC | GRPM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.89% | -1.10% | +0.21% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.95% | -5.67% | +2.72% |
Ulcer IndexDepth 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
| FFLC | GRPM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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.
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