PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FGLS.NEO vs. FGRO.NEO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FGLS.NEO vs. FGRO.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 All-in-One Growth ETF (FGRO.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FGLS.NEO achieves a 6.44% return, which is significantly lower than FGRO.NEO's 10.74% 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%

FGRO.NEO

1D
0.48%
1M
0.90%
6M
7.60%
YTD
10.74%
1Y
20.09%
3Y*
20.20%
5Y*
13.34%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
13.71%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CA$98.45KCA$628.31KCA$493.48K
CA$7.06MCA$6.78MCA$8.68M

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


2026 (YTD)20252024
FGLS.NEO
Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF
6.44%8.38%-21.20%
FGRO.NEO
Fidelity All-in-One Growth ETF
10.74%17.00%24.09%

Correlation

The correlation between FGLS.NEO and FGRO.NEO is -0.29, 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

-0.29

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

-0.33

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. FGRO.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: 1818
Overall Rank
FGLS.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1818
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FGLS.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 1919
Sortino Ratio Rank
FGLS.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 1919
Omega Ratio Rank
FGLS.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 1818
Calmar Ratio Rank
FGLS.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 1717
Martin Ratio Rank

FGRO.NEO
FGRO.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
FGRO.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FGRO.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
FGRO.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
FGRO.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
FGRO.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
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. FGRO.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 All-in-One Growth ETF (FGRO.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.NEOFGRO.NEODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.62

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.35

-0.27

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.38

2.67

-2.29

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.78

10.96

-10.18

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

The current FGLS.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 0.29, which is lower than the FGRO.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 1.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FGLS.NEO and FGRO.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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

FGLS.NEO vs. FGRO.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FGLS.NEO drawdown since its inception was -25.89%, which is greater than FGRO.NEO's maximum drawdown of -17.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FGLS.NEO and FGRO.NEO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FGLS.NEOFGRO.NEODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.89%

-17.50%

-8.39%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-21.12%

-7.54%

-13.58%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.45%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.50%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.21%

-1.66%

-7.55%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.41%

-3.11%

-11.30%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.39%

1.84%

+8.55%

Volatility

FGLS.NEO vs. FGRO.NEO - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF (FGLS.NEO) has a higher volatility of 12.93% compared to Fidelity All-in-One Growth ETF (FGRO.NEO) at 2.86%. This indicates that FGLS.NEO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FGRO.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FGLS.NEOFGRO.NEODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

12.93%

2.86%

+10.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

22.31%

8.72%

+13.59%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

28.32%

10.56%

+17.76%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.35%

10.64%

+13.71%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.35%

10.43%

+13.92%

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

FGLS.NEO has a 1.51% expense ratio, which is higher than FGRO.NEO's 0.42% expense ratio.


Dividends

FGLS.NEO vs. FGRO.NEO - Dividend Comparison

FGLS.NEO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FGRO.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
FGLS.NEO
Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
FGRO.NEO
Fidelity All-in-One Growth ETF
1.12%1.24%1.09%1.39%1.82%0.94%

Frequently Asked Questions


FGLS.NEO and FGRO.NEO have a correlation of -0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, FGRO.NEO is cheaper at 0.42% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

FGRO.NEO is cheaper with a 0.42% expense ratio, compared with 1.51% for FGLS.NEO.

FGLS.NEO is categorized as Long-Short, while FGRO.NEO is Diversified Portfolio. Their fees differ too: 1.51% for FGLS.NEO and 0.42% for FGRO.NEO.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FGLS.NEO and FGRO.NEO

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