FFLG vs. DARP

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FFLG (Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF) and DARP (Grizzle Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FFLG returned 39.38% vs 82.62% for DARP. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FFLG charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for DARP.

Performance

FFLG vs. DARP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG) and Grizzle Growth ETF (DARP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FFLG achieves a 16.49% return, which is significantly lower than DARP's 32.67% return.

FFLG

• 1D: -0.90%
• 1M: 7.34%
• YTD: 16.49%
• 6M: 16.21%
• 1Y: 39.38%
• 3Y*: 28.99%
• 5Y*: 12.59%
• 10Y*: —

DARP

• 1D: -0.76%
• 1M: 8.18%
• YTD: 32.67%
• 6M: 34.22%
• 1Y: 82.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FFLG vs. DARP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FFLG Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF	16.49%	19.61%	32.29%	13.11%
DARP Grizzle Growth ETF	32.67%	40.19%	24.63%	6.25%

Correlation

The correlation between FFLG and DARP is 0.86, 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	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 29, 2023	0.89

The correlation between FFLG and DARP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

FFLG vs. DARP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FFLG	DARP
Technology	51.7%	45.8%
Communication Services	15.1%	19.4%
Consumer Cyclical	11.3%	6.6%
Healthcare	6.4%	1.4%
Industrials	5.9%	12.0%
Financial Services	3.3%	-
Utilities	1.4%	5.4%
Basic Materials	1.4%	4.7%
Real Estate	0.7%	-
Consumer Defensive	0.6%	-
Energy	0.3%	9.9%

Return for Risk

FFLG vs. DARP — Risk / Return Rank

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

FFLG

FFLG Risk / Return Rank: 60
FFLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
FFLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
FFLG Omega Ratio Rank: 59
FFLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
FFLG Martin Ratio Rank: 60

DARP

DARP Risk / Return Rank: 91
DARP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
DARP Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
DARP Omega Ratio Rank: 87
DARP Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
DARP Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

FFLG vs. DARP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG) and Grizzle Growth ETF (DARP). 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.

	FFLG	DARP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.16	3.59	-1.43
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.85	4.03	-1.18
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.54	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.78	7.03	-4.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.87	26.75	-15.88
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FFLG vs. DARP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FFLG Sharpe Ratio is 2.16, which is lower than the DARP Sharpe Ratio of 3.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FFLG and DARP, 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

	FFLG	DARP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.16	3.59	-1.43
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.50	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.44	1.49	-1.05

Drawdowns

FFLG vs. DARP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FFLG drawdown since its inception was -44.52%, which is greater than DARP's maximum drawdown of -30.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFLG and DARP.

Drawdown Indicators

	FFLG	DARP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.52%	-30.27%	-14.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.23%	-11.82%	-2.41%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.72%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-44.52%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.90%	-0.76%	-0.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.27%	-4.64%	-9.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.63%	3.10%	+0.53%

Volatility

FFLG vs. DARP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG) is 4.60%, while Grizzle Growth ETF (DARP) has a volatility of 7.07%. This indicates that FFLG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DARP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FFLG	DARP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.60%	7.07%	-2.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.11%	17.49%	-3.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.30%	23.16%	-4.86%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.34%	26.11%	-0.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.38%	26.11%	-0.73%

FFLG vs. DARP - Expense Ratio Comparison

FFLG has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is lower than DARP's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

FFLG vs. DARP - Dividend Comparison

FFLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.13%, less than DARP's 0.33% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DARP Grizzle Growth ETF	0.33%	0.43%	1.93%	0.32%	0.00%	0.00%
FFLG Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF	0.13%	0.14%	0.09%	0.00%	1.50%	0.55%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FFLG and DARP in my portfolio?

FFLG and DARP have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FFLG or DARP?

DARP has higher volatility (7.07%) compared to FFLG (4.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFLG dropped -44.52% vs DARP's -30.27%.

Which ETF is better, FFLG or DARP?

On 1-year performance, DARP leads with 82.62% vs 39.38% for FFLG. On fees, FFLG is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, FFLG has been the lower-risk option at 4.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FFLG or DARP?

Over the 1-year period, DARP has performed better with a 82.62% return vs 39.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FFLG or DARP?

FFLG is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for DARP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FFLG or DARP?

DARP has the higher dividend yield at 0.33%, compared with 0.13% for FFLG.

What is the main difference between FFLG and DARP?

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Grizzle. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for FFLG and 0.75% for DARP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DARP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.59 vs 2.16), 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.