FFLC vs. SCHG
FFLC (Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF) and SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FFLC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while SCHG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. FFLC is actively managed, while SCHG is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FFLC returned 16.06%/yr vs 13.27%/yr for SCHG. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FFLC charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHG.
Performance
FFLC vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FFLC achieves a 9.17% return, which is significantly higher than SCHG's 1.35% return.
FFLC
- 1D
- -1.70%
- 1M
- -0.03%
- YTD
- 9.17%
- 6M
- 8.34%
- 1Y
- 24.45%
- 3Y*
- 22.21%
- 5Y*
- 16.06%
- 10Y*
- —
SCHG
- 1D
- -1.37%
- 1M
- -3.93%
- YTD
- 1.35%
- 6M
- 0.09%
- 1Y
- 17.91%
- 3Y*
- 22.13%
- 5Y*
- 13.27%
- 10Y*
- 18.65%
FFLC vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FFLC Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF | 9.17% | 17.67% | 27.89% | 25.07% | -0.04% | 24.53% | 19.50% |
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF | 1.35% | 17.50% | 34.95% | 50.10% | -31.80% | 28.11% | 29.32% |
Correlation
The correlation between FFLC and SCHG is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.83 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020 | 0.75 |
The correlation between FFLC and SCHG shifts across timeframes, from 0.75 (all time) to 0.91 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
FFLC vs. SCHG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FFLC
SCHG
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Technology
FFLC
SCHG
Financial Services
FFLC
SCHG
Industrials
FFLC
SCHG
Communication Services
FFLC
SCHG
Consumer Cyclical
FFLC
SCHG
Healthcare
FFLC
SCHG
Consumer Defensive
FFLC
SCHG
Energy
FFLC
SCHG
Utilities
FFLC
SCHG
Basic Materials
FFLC
SCHG
Real Estate
FFLC
SCHG
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. SCHG — Risk / Return Rank
FFLC
SCHG
FFLC vs. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). 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 | SCHG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.70 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.93 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.20 | +0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.46 | 1.10 | +1.36 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.96 | 3.58 | +7.38 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FFLC vs. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FFLC drawdown since its inception was -19.72%, smaller than the maximum SCHG drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFLC and SCHG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FFLC | SCHG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.72% | -34.59% | +14.87% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.98% | -16.41% | +6.43% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.72% | -23.39% | +3.67% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.72% | -34.59% | +14.87% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -34.59% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.37% | -6.46% | +4.09% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.98% | -5.20% | +2.22% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.24% | 5.02% | -2.78% |
Volatility
FFLC vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) is 5.32%, while Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) has a volatility of 5.91%. This indicates that FFLC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCHG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FFLC | SCHG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.32% | 5.91% | -0.59% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.71% | 12.52% | -1.81% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.56% | 16.24% | -2.68% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.00% | 22.38% | -5.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.69% | 21.58% | -3.89% |
FFLC vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison
FFLC has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG's 0.04% expense ratio.
Dividends
FFLC vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison
FFLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, more than SCHG's 0.38% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FFLC Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF | 1.01% | 1.10% | 0.82% | 0.57% | 1.67% | 1.68% | 0.89% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF | 0.38% | 0.36% | 0.39% | 0.46% | 0.55% | 0.42% | 0.52% | 0.82% | 1.27% | 1.01% | 1.04% | 1.22% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.91, FFLC and SCHG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
SCHG has higher volatility (5.91%) compared to FFLC (5.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFLC dropped -19.72% vs SCHG's -34.59%.
On 5-year performance, FFLC leads with 16.06% vs 13.27% for SCHG. On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, FFLC has been the lower-risk option at 5.32%. 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 16.06% return vs 13.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SCHG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for FFLC.
FFLC has the higher dividend yield at 1.01%, compared with 0.38% for SCHG.
FFLC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while SCHG is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for FFLC and 0.04% for SCHG.
FFLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.81 vs 1.11), 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 SCHG
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