PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
FGLS.NEO vs. CSM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

FGLS.NEO vs. CSM

Last updated Jul 3, 2026
See Documentation

FGLS.NEO (Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF) and CSM (Proshares Large Cap Core Plus) are both Long-Short funds. FGLS.NEO is actively managed, while CSM is passively managed. Over the past year, FGLS.NEO returned 3.00% vs 27.09% for CSM. At a correlation of -0.34, they often move in opposite directions. FGLS.NEO charges 1.51%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for CSM.

Performance

FGLS.NEO vs. CSM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF (FGLS.NEO) and Proshares Large Cap Core Plus (CSM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Different Trading Currencies

FGLS.NEO is traded in CAD, while CSM is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the CSM values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FGLS.NEO achieves a 0.47% return, which is significantly lower than CSM's 11.77% return.

FGLS.NEO

1D
5.54%
1M
11.00%
6M
0.47%
YTD
0.47%
1Y
3.00%
3Y*
—
5Y*
—
10Y*
—

CSM

1D
0.25%
1M
0.98%
6M
11.77%
YTD
11.77%
1Y
27.09%
3Y*
22.87%
5Y*
15.51%
10Y*
15.31%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FGLS.NEO vs. CSM - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024
FGLS.NEO
Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF		0.47%8.38%-21.20%
CSM
Proshares Large Cap Core Plus		11.77%16.28%28.78%

Correlation

The correlation between FGLS.NEO and CSM is -0.36, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

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

-0.36

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024

-0.34

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF

Proshares Large Cap Core Plus

Often compared with CSM:
CSM vs. SPYCSM vs. VOOCSM vs. QQQCSM vs. VTICSM vs. BRK-BCSM vs. BDGSCSM vs. MGK

Return for Risk

FGLS.NEO vs. CSM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
FGLS.NEO
FGLS.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 1010
Overall Rank
FGLS.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1010
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FGLS.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 1010
Sortino Ratio Rank
FGLS.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 1010
Omega Ratio Rank
FGLS.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 1010
Calmar Ratio Rank
FGLS.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 1010
Martin Ratio Rank
CSM
CSM Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
CSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6565
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
CSM Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
CSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
CSM Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
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.

FGLS.NEO vs. CSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF (FGLS.NEO) and Proshares Large Cap Core Plus (CSM). 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.

FGLS.NEOCSMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
0.12
2.15

-2.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
0.36
2.99

-2.63

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.04

1.37

-0.33

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.14

2.94

-2.80

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.30

10.57

-10.27

FGLS.NEO vs. CSM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FGLS.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 0.12, which is lower than the CSM Sharpe Ratio of 2.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FGLS.NEO and CSM, 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

FGLS.NEO vs. CSM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FGLS.NEO drawdown since its inception was -25.89%, smaller than the maximum CSM drawdown of -30.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FGLS.NEO and CSM.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

FGLS.NEOCSMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.89%

-30.41%

+4.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-21.12%

-9.24%

-11.88%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

—

-19.38%

—

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

—

-21.25%

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

—

-30.41%

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-14.30%

0.00%

-14.30%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.47%

-3.48%

-10.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.07%

2.57%

+7.50%

Volatility

FGLS.NEO vs. CSM - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF (FGLS.NEO) has a higher volatility of 10.82% compared to Proshares Large Cap Core Plus (CSM) at 4.68%. This indicates that FGLS.NEO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

FGLS.NEOCSMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.82%

4.68%

+6.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

19.47%

9.95%

+9.52%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.20%

12.66%

+13.54%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

23.51%

18.11%

+5.40%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.51%

19.37%

+4.14%

FGLS.NEO vs. CSM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FGLS.NEO has a 1.51% expense ratio, which is higher than CSM's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

FGLS.NEO vs. CSM - Dividend Comparison

FGLS.NEO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CSM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.05%.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CSM
Proshares Large Cap Core Plus		1.05%1.04%1.06%1.17%1.37%0.78%1.21%1.41%1.54%1.28%1.49%1.67%
FGLS.NEO
Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF		0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

FGLS.NEO and CSM have a correlation of -0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CSM is cheaper at 0.45% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CSM is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 1.51% for FGLS.NEO.

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 1.51% for FGLS.NEO and 0.45% for CSM.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FGLS.NEO and CSM

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