FFLG vs. SMH
FFLG (Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF) and SMH (VanEck Semiconductor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FFLG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while SMH is a Semiconductors fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Semiconductor 25 Index. FFLG is actively managed, while SMH is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FFLG returned 12.59%/yr vs 39.21%/yr for SMH. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FFLG charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for SMH.
Performance
FFLG vs. SMH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FFLG achieves a 16.49% return, which is significantly lower than SMH's 77.13% return.
FFLG
- 1D
- -0.90%
- 1M
- 7.34%
- YTD
- 16.49%
- 6M
- 16.21%
- 1Y
- 39.38%
- 3Y*
- 28.99%
- 5Y*
- 12.59%
- 10Y*
- —
SMH
- 1D
- 0.90%
- 1M
- 25.87%
- YTD
- 77.13%
- 6M
- 75.61%
- 1Y
- 157.20%
- 3Y*
- 64.17%
- 5Y*
- 39.21%
- 10Y*
- 37.68%
FFLG vs. SMH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FFLG Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF | 16.49% | 19.61% | 32.29% | 49.71% | -37.86% | 1.72% |
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF | 77.13% | 49.17% | 39.10% | 73.38% | -33.53% | 31.03% |
Correlation
The correlation between FFLG and SMH is 0.78, 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 | 0.78 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021 | 0.84 |
The correlation between FFLG and SMH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.
FFLG vs. SMH - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FFLG
SMH
Technology
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Financial Services
-
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
-
Real Estate
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Technology
FFLG
SMH
Communication Services
FFLG
SMH
-
Consumer Cyclical
FFLG
SMH
-
Healthcare
FFLG
SMH
-
Industrials
FFLG
SMH
-
Financial Services
FFLG
SMH
-
Utilities
FFLG
SMH
-
Basic Materials
FFLG
SMH
-
Real Estate
FFLG
SMH
-
Consumer Defensive
FFLG
SMH
-
Energy
FFLG
SMH
-
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. SMH — Risk / Return Rank
FFLG
SMH
FFLG vs. SMH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG) and VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH). 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 | SMH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.02 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.37 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.72 | -0.35 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.78 | 10.59 | -7.81 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.87 | 40.63 | -29.75 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FFLG | SMH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.16 | 5.19 | -3.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.50 | 1.13 | -0.63 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 1.16 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.44 | 0.34 | +0.10 |
Drawdowns
FFLG vs. SMH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FFLG drawdown since its inception was -44.52%, smaller than the maximum SMH drawdown of -84.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FFLG and SMH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FFLG | SMH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -44.52% | -84.96% | +40.44% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.23% | -14.93% | +0.70% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.72% | -35.74% | +9.02% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -44.52% | -45.30% | +0.78% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -45.30% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.90% | 0.00% | -0.90% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.27% | -41.09% | +26.82% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.63% | 3.89% | -0.26% |
Volatility
FFLG vs. SMH - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG) is 4.60%, while VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) has a volatility of 11.47%. This indicates that FFLG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SMH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FFLG | SMH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.60% | 11.47% | -6.87% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.11% | 24.29% | -10.18% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.30% | 30.56% | -12.26% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.34% | 35.01% | -9.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.38% | 32.57% | -7.19% |
FFLG vs. SMH - Expense Ratio Comparison
FFLG has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is higher than SMH's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
FFLG vs. SMH - Dividend Comparison
FFLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.13%, less than SMH's 0.17% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FFLG Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF | 0.13% | 0.14% | 0.09% | 0.00% | 1.50% | 0.55% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF | 0.17% | 0.31% | 0.44% | 0.60% | 1.18% | 0.51% | 0.69% | 1.50% | 1.88% | 1.43% | 0.80% | 2.14% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FFLG and SMH have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SMH has higher volatility (11.47%) compared to FFLG (4.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FFLG dropped -44.52% vs SMH's -84.96%.
On 5-year performance, SMH leads with 39.21% vs 12.59% for FFLG. On fees, SMH is cheaper at 0.35% 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.
Over the 5-year period, SMH has performed better with a 39.21% return vs 12.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SMH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for FFLG.
SMH has the higher dividend yield at 0.17%, compared with 0.13% for FFLG.
FFLG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while SMH is Semiconductors. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.38% for FFLG and 0.35% for SMH.
SMH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.19 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.
Find the right allocation for FFLG and SMH
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