PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FFLG vs. FFSM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FFLG vs. FFSM - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FFLG achieves a 6.61% return, which is significantly lower than FFSM's 19.99% return.


FFLG

1D
1.11%
1M
-3.89%
6M
6.18%
YTD
6.61%
1Y
17.84%
3Y*
21.43%
5Y*
9.07%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
9.02%

FFSM

1D
0.52%
1M
-1.26%
6M
14.51%
YTD
19.99%
1Y
35.51%
3Y*
18.11%
5Y*
10.60%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
12.02%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$2.78M$5.96M$4.00M
$10.97M$10.32M$6.89M

FFLG vs. FFSM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
FFLG
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF
6.61%19.61%32.29%49.71%-37.86%2.32%
FFSM
Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF
19.99%14.89%14.38%17.30%-16.35%20.44%

Correlation

The correlation between FFLG and FFSM is 0.68, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.68

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.68

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.76

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 4, 2021

0.74

The correlation between FFLG and FFSM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

FFLG vs. FFSM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FFLG
FFSM

Technology

49.2%
19.9%

Communication Services

16.1%
0.6%

Healthcare

7.4%
9.8%

Industrials

7.2%
21.9%

Consumer Cyclical

6.9%
11.3%

Financial Services

3.6%
13.9%

Utilities

1.7%
2.3%

Basic Materials

1.2%
6.9%

Real Estate

0.9%
5.0%

Consumer Defensive

0.6%
4.3%

Energy

0.3%
4.2%

Technology

FFLG
49.2%
FFSM
19.9%

Communication Services

FFLG
16.1%
FFSM
0.6%

Healthcare

FFLG
7.4%
FFSM
9.8%

Industrials

FFLG
7.2%
FFSM
21.9%

Consumer Cyclical

FFLG
6.9%
FFSM
11.3%

Financial Services

FFLG
3.6%
FFSM
13.9%

Utilities

FFLG
1.7%
FFSM
2.3%

Basic Materials

FFLG
1.2%
FFSM
6.9%

Real Estate

FFLG
0.9%
FFSM
5.0%

Consumer Defensive

FFLG
0.6%
FFSM
4.3%

Energy

FFLG
0.3%
FFSM
4.2%

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

FFLG vs. FFSM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FFLG
FFLG Risk / Return Rank: 3030
Overall Rank
FFLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2929
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FFLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
FFLG Omega Ratio Rank: 2828
Omega Ratio Rank
FFLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
FFLG Martin Ratio Rank: 3535
Martin Ratio Rank

FFSM
FFSM Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
FFSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FFSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
FFSM Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
FFSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
FFSM Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FFLG vs. FFSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


FFLGFFSMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.09

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.49

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.13

1.31

-0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.05

3.26

-2.21

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.39

12.18

-8.79

FFLG vs. FFSM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FFLG Sharpe Ratio is 0.70, which is lower than the FFSM Sharpe Ratio of 1.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FFLG and FFSM, 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

FFLG vs. FFSM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FFLG drawdown since its inception was -44.52%, which is greater than FFSM's maximum drawdown of -26.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFLG and FFSM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FFLGFFSMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.52%

-26.65%

-17.87%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.23%

-10.37%

-3.86%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-26.72%

-24.78%

-1.94%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-44.52%

-26.65%

-17.87%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.30%

-3.85%

-5.45%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.01%

-7.69%

-6.32%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.40%

2.77%

+1.63%

Volatility

FFLG vs. FFSM - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG) has a higher volatility of 7.67% compared to Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF (FFSM) at 4.27%. This indicates that FFLG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FFSM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FFLGFFSMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.67%

4.27%

+3.40%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

17.51%

14.82%

+2.69%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.35%

18.90%

+2.45%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

25.76%

20.73%

+5.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

25.51%

20.53%

+4.98%

FFLG vs. FFSM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FFLG has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is lower than FFSM's 0.43% expense ratio.


Dividends

FFLG vs. FFSM - Dividend Comparison

FFLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.14%, less than FFSM's 0.44% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
FFLG
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF
0.14%0.14%0.09%0.00%1.50%0.55%
FFSM
Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF
0.44%0.56%0.62%0.56%0.58%0.37%

Frequently Asked Questions


FFLG and FFSM have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FFLG has higher volatility (7.67%) compared to FFSM (4.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFLG dropped -44.52% vs FFSM's -26.65%.

On 5-year performance, FFSM leads with 10.60% vs 9.07% for FFLG. On fees, FFLG is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, FFSM has been the lower-risk option at 4.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FFSM has performed better with a 10.60% return vs 9.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FFLG is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.43% for FFSM.

FFSM has the higher dividend yield at 0.44%, compared with 0.14% for FFLG.

FFLG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while FFSM is Mid Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for FFLG and 0.43% for FFSM.

FFSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.79 vs 0.70), 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 FFLG and FFSM

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