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

Performance

FFLC vs. SPTM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) and SPDR Portfolio S&P 1500 Composite Stock Market ETF (SPTM). 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 10.26% return, which is significantly lower than SPTM's 11.10% return.


FFLC

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

SPTM

1D
-0.67%
1M
4.87%
YTD
11.10%
6M
11.13%
1Y
27.84%
3Y*
21.90%
5Y*
13.38%
10Y*
15.21%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FFLC vs. SPTM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
FFLC
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF
10.26%17.67%27.89%25.07%-0.04%24.53%18.76%
SPTM
SPDR Portfolio S&P 1500 Composite Stock Market ETF
11.10%16.93%23.87%25.55%-17.75%28.58%22.27%

Correlation

The correlation between FFLC and SPTM is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.96

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

0.96

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

0.92

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2020

0.89

The correlation between FFLC and SPTM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

FFLC vs. SPTM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FFLC
SPTM

Technology

32.3%
34.0%

Communication Services

11.8%
10.5%

Financial Services

11.3%
12.1%

Consumer Cyclical

10.9%
10.3%

Industrials

10.8%
9.4%

Healthcare

8.1%
8.6%

Energy

4.8%
3.7%

Consumer Defensive

4.1%
4.8%

Utilities

2.6%
2.3%

Basic Materials

1.8%
2.0%

Real Estate

1.1%
2.3%

Technology

FFLC
32.3%
SPTM
34.0%

Communication Services

FFLC
11.8%
SPTM
10.5%

Financial Services

FFLC
11.3%
SPTM
12.1%

Consumer Cyclical

FFLC
10.9%
SPTM
10.3%

Industrials

FFLC
10.8%
SPTM
9.4%

Healthcare

FFLC
8.1%
SPTM
8.6%

Energy

FFLC
4.8%
SPTM
3.7%

Consumer Defensive

FFLC
4.1%
SPTM
4.8%

Utilities

FFLC
2.6%
SPTM
2.3%

Basic Materials

FFLC
1.8%
SPTM
2.0%

Real Estate

FFLC
1.1%
SPTM
2.3%

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. SPTM — Risk / Return Rank

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

FFLC
FFLC Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
FFLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FFLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
FFLC Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
FFLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
FFLC Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
Martin Ratio Rank

SPTM
SPTM Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
SPTM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SPTM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
SPTM Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
SPTM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
SPTM Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
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. SPTM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) and SPDR Portfolio S&P 1500 Composite Stock Market ETF (SPTM). 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.


FFLCSPTMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.24

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.32

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

1.43

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.71

3.22

-0.51

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.30

15.01

-2.72

FFLC vs. SPTM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FFLC Sharpe Ratio is 2.12, which is comparable to the SPTM Sharpe Ratio of 2.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FFLC and SPTM, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FFLCSPTMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.12

2.36

-0.24

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.94

0.80

+0.14

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.85

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.17

0.46

+0.71

Drawdowns

FFLC vs. SPTM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FFLC drawdown since its inception was -19.72%, smaller than the maximum SPTM drawdown of -54.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFLC and SPTM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FFLCSPTMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.72%

-54.80%

+35.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.98%

-8.68%

-1.30%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.72%

-18.87%

-0.85%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.72%

-24.14%

+4.42%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.66%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.68%

-0.67%

-0.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.99%

-9.05%

+6.06%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.20%

1.86%

+0.34%

Volatility

FFLC vs. SPTM - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) has a higher volatility of 3.15% compared to SPDR Portfolio S&P 1500 Composite Stock Market ETF (SPTM) at 2.88%. This indicates that FFLC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SPTM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FFLCSPTMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.15%

2.88%

+0.27%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.73%

8.92%

+0.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.80%

11.88%

+0.92%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.92%

16.87%

+0.05%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.65%

18.03%

-0.38%

FFLC vs. SPTM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FFLC has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is higher than SPTM's 0.03% expense ratio.


Dividends

FFLC vs. SPTM - Dividend Comparison

FFLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.00%, less than SPTM's 1.04% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FFLC
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF
1.00%1.10%0.82%0.57%1.67%1.68%0.89%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
SPTM
SPDR Portfolio S&P 1500 Composite Stock Market ETF
1.04%1.13%1.28%1.44%1.69%1.25%1.56%1.72%1.90%1.66%1.91%1.92%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.96, FFLC and SPTM 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.

FFLC has higher volatility (3.15%) compared to SPTM (2.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFLC dropped -19.72% vs SPTM's -54.80%.

On 5-year performance, FFLC leads with 15.85% vs 13.38% for SPTM. On fees, SPTM is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, SPTM has been the lower-risk option at 2.88%. 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 15.85% return vs 13.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SPTM is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for FFLC.

SPTM has the higher dividend yield at 1.04%, compared with 1.00% for FFLC.

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for FFLC and 0.03% for SPTM.

SPTM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.36 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FFLC and SPTM

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