FGLS.NEO vs. FBTC
FGLS.NEO (Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF) and FBTC (Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - FGLS.NEO is a Long-Short fund actively managed by Fidelity, while FBTC is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the Fidelity Bitcoin Reference Rate. FGLS.NEO is actively managed, while FBTC is passively managed. Over the past year, FGLS.NEO returned 3.00% vs -41.80% for FBTC. At a correlation of -0.41, they often move in opposite directions. FGLS.NEO charges 1.51%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for FBTC.
Performance
FGLS.NEO vs. FBTC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
FGLS.NEO is traded in CAD, while FBTC is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the FBTC 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 higher than FBTC's -27.11% return.
FGLS.NEO
- 1D
- 5.54%
- 1M
- 11.00%
- 6M
- 0.47%
- YTD
- 0.47%
- 1Y
- 3.00%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FBTC
- 1D
- 2.56%
- 1M
- -5.95%
- 6M
- -27.11%
- YTD
- -27.11%
- 1Y
- -41.80%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FGLS.NEO vs. FBTC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
FGLS.NEO Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF | 0.47% | 8.38% | -21.20% |
FBTC Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund | -27.11% | -10.82% | 134.56% |
Correlation
The correlation between FGLS.NEO and FBTC is -0.46, 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 | -0.46 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024 | -0.41 |
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
FGLS.NEO vs. FBTC — Risk / Return Rank
FGLS.NEO
FBTC
FGLS.NEO vs. FBTC - 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 Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund (FBTC). 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.NEO | FBTC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.06 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.73 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.04 | 0.85 | +0.19 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.14 | -0.80 | +0.94 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.30 | -1.30 | +1.60 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FGLS.NEO vs. FBTC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FGLS.NEO drawdown since its inception was -25.89%, smaller than the maximum FBTC drawdown of -52.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FGLS.NEO and FBTC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FGLS.NEO | FBTC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.89% | -52.54% | +26.65% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.12% | -52.54% | +31.42% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.30% | -50.21% | +35.91% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.47% | -17.08% | +2.61% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.07% | 32.28% | -22.21% |
Volatility
FGLS.NEO vs. FBTC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF (FGLS.NEO) is 10.82%, while Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund (FBTC) has a volatility of 12.95%. This indicates that FGLS.NEO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FBTC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FGLS.NEO | FBTC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.82% | 12.95% | -2.13% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.47% | 34.79% | -15.32% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.20% | 44.59% | -18.39% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.51% | 50.35% | -26.84% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.51% | 50.35% | -26.84% |
FGLS.NEO vs. FBTC - Expense Ratio Comparison
FGLS.NEO has a 1.51% expense ratio, which is higher than FBTC's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
FGLS.NEO vs. FBTC - Dividend Comparison
Neither FGLS.NEO nor FBTC has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
FGLS.NEO and FBTC have a correlation of -0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FBTC is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FBTC is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 1.51% for FGLS.NEO.
FGLS.NEO is categorized as Long-Short, while FBTC is Cryptocurrency. Their fees differ too: 1.51% for FGLS.NEO and 0.25% for FBTC.
Find the right allocation for FGLS.NEO and FBTC
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