FGLS.NEO vs. FCMO.NEO

Last updated Jul 25, 2026

FGLS.NEO (Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF) and FCMO.NEO (Fidelity US Momentum ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FGLS.NEO is a Long-Short fund actively managed by Fidelity, while FCMO.NEO is a Momentum fund tracking the Fidelity Canada U.S. Momentum Index. FGLS.NEO is actively managed, while FCMO.NEO is passively managed. Over the past year, FGLS.NEO returned 8.09% vs 27.60% for FCMO.NEO. At a correlation of -0.51, they often move in opposite directions. FGLS.NEO charges 1.51%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for FCMO.NEO.

Performance

FGLS.NEO vs. FCMO.NEO - 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 Fidelity US Momentum ETF (FCMO.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FGLS.NEO achieves a 6.44% return, which is significantly lower than FCMO.NEO's 19.72% return.

FGLS.NEO

• 1D: 5.45%
• 1M: 9.25%
• 6M: 6.94%
• YTD: 6.44%
• 1Y: 8.09%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -3.78%

FCMO.NEO

• 1D: -0.91%
• 1M: -1.67%
• 6M: 16.38%
• YTD: 19.72%
• 1Y: 27.60%
• 3Y*: 31.82%
• 5Y*: 17.66%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -1.46%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FCMO.NEO Fidelity US Momentum ETF	CA$252.59K	CA$286.79K	CA$398.92K
FGLS.NEO Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF	CA$98.45K	CA$628.31K	CA$493.48K

FGLS.NEO vs. FCMO.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FGLS.NEO Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF	6.44%	8.38%	-21.20%
FCMO.NEO Fidelity US Momentum ETF	19.72%	13.77%	46.88%

Correlation

The correlation between FGLS.NEO and FCMO.NEO is -0.53, 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	-0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024	-0.51

The correlation between FGLS.NEO and FCMO.NEO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.53 to -0.51 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FGLS.NEO vs. FCMO.NEO — 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: 18
FGLS.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
FGLS.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
FGLS.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 19
FGLS.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
FGLS.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 17

FCMO.NEO

FCMO.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 63
FCMO.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
FCMO.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
FCMO.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 61
FCMO.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
FCMO.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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. FCMO.NEO - 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 US Momentum ETF (FCMO.NEO). 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	FCMO.NEO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.29	1.38	-1.09
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.64	1.99	-1.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.26	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.38	2.54	-2.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.78	8.21	-7.43

FGLS.NEO vs. FCMO.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FGLS.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 0.29, which is lower than the FCMO.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FGLS.NEO and FCMO.NEO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FGLS.NEO vs. FCMO.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FGLS.NEO drawdown since its inception was -25.89%, smaller than the maximum FCMO.NEO drawdown of -67.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FGLS.NEO and FCMO.NEO.

Drawdown Indicators

	FGLS.NEO	FCMO.NEO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.89%	-67.39%	+41.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.12%	-10.91%	-10.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-21.82%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.93%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.21%	-8.88%	-0.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.41%	-48.59%	+34.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.39%	3.37%	+7.02%

Volatility

FGLS.NEO vs. FCMO.NEO - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF (FGLS.NEO) has a higher volatility of 12.93% compared to Fidelity US Momentum ETF (FCMO.NEO) at 5.70%. This indicates that FGLS.NEO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FCMO.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FGLS.NEO	FCMO.NEO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.93%	5.70%	+7.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.31%	16.97%	+5.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.32%	20.16%	+8.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.35%	18.42%	+5.93%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.35%	32.54%	-8.19%

FGLS.NEO vs. FCMO.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

FGLS.NEO has a 1.51% expense ratio, which is higher than FCMO.NEO's 0.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

FGLS.NEO vs. FCMO.NEO - Dividend Comparison

FGLS.NEO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FCMO.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.30%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FCMO.NEO Fidelity US Momentum ETF	0.30%	0.36%	0.25%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.28%
FGLS.NEO Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FGLS.NEO and FCMO.NEO in my portfolio?

FGLS.NEO and FCMO.NEO have a correlation of -0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FGLS.NEO or FCMO.NEO?

On fees, FCMO.NEO is cheaper at 0.38% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FGLS.NEO or FCMO.NEO?

FCMO.NEO is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 1.51% for FGLS.NEO.

What is the main difference between FGLS.NEO and FCMO.NEO?

FGLS.NEO is categorized as Long-Short, while FCMO.NEO is Momentum. Their fees differ too: 1.51% for FGLS.NEO and 0.38% for FCMO.NEO.