FGQD.L vs. FUSA.L
FGQD.L (Fidelity Global Quality Income ETF) and FUSA.L (Fidelity US Quality Income ETF Acc) are both exchange-traded funds - FGQD.L is a Global Equities fund tracking the Fidelity Global Quality Income index, while FUSA.L is a Dividend fund tracking the Fidelity US Quality Income Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FGQD.L returned 11.86%/yr vs 12.96%/yr for FUSA.L. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FGQD.L charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for FUSA.L.
Performance
FGQD.L vs. FUSA.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
FGQD.L is traded in GBp, while FUSA.L is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the FUSA.L values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FGQD.L achieves a 10.28% return, which is significantly higher than FUSA.L's 8.45% return.
FGQD.L
- 1D
- 0.18%
- 1M
- 4.38%
- YTD
- 10.28%
- 6M
- 10.17%
- 1Y
- 26.89%
- 3Y*
- 14.75%
- 5Y*
- 11.86%
- 10Y*
- —
FUSA.L
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 4.49%
- YTD
- 8.45%
- 6M
- 8.10%
- 1Y
- 24.90%
- 3Y*
- 15.03%
- 5Y*
- 12.96%
- 10Y*
- —
FGQD.L vs. FUSA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FGQD.L Fidelity Global Quality Income ETF | 10.28% | 11.78% | 13.21% | 11.51% | -0.25% | 23.78% | 6.42% | 23.83% | -5.23% |
FUSA.L Fidelity US Quality Income ETF Acc | 8.45% | 8.02% | 20.04% | 12.14% | 0.13% | 27.42% | 8.73% | 26.82% | -3.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between FGQD.L and FUSA.L is 0.58, 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 | 0.58 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 13, 2018 | 0.79 |
Over the past year, the correlation between FGQD.L and FUSA.L has dropped to 0.58 - well below their long-term average of 0.79, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
FGQD.L vs. FUSA.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FGQD.L
FUSA.L
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Basic Materials
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
FGQD.L
FUSA.L
Financial Services
FGQD.L
FUSA.L
Industrials
FGQD.L
FUSA.L
Healthcare
FGQD.L
FUSA.L
Consumer Cyclical
FGQD.L
FUSA.L
Communication Services
FGQD.L
FUSA.L
Consumer Defensive
FGQD.L
FUSA.L
Energy
FGQD.L
FUSA.L
Basic Materials
FGQD.L
FUSA.L
Utilities
FGQD.L
FUSA.L
Real Estate
FGQD.L
FUSA.L
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
FGQD.L vs. FUSA.L — Risk / Return Rank
FGQD.L
FUSA.L
FGQD.L vs. FUSA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Global Quality Income ETF (FGQD.L) and Fidelity US Quality Income ETF Acc (FUSA.L). 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.
| FGQD.L | FUSA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.76 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.95 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.58 | 1.42 | +0.16 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.86 | 4.44 | -0.58 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.82 | 16.80 | +0.02 |
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
| FGQD.L | FUSA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.01 | 2.26 | +0.76 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.98 | 0.90 | +0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.87 | 0.84 | +0.03 |
Drawdowns
FGQD.L vs. FUSA.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FGQD.L drawdown since its inception was -26.43%, smaller than the maximum FUSA.L drawdown of -27.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FGQD.L and FUSA.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FGQD.L | FUSA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -26.43% | -27.94% | +1.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.93% | -5.58% | -1.35% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.90% | -19.20% | +2.30% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -16.90% | -19.20% | +2.30% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.90% | -3.35% | +0.45% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.59% | 1.48% | +0.11% |
Volatility
FGQD.L vs. FUSA.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Fidelity Global Quality Income ETF (FGQD.L) is 1.88%, while Fidelity US Quality Income ETF Acc (FUSA.L) has a volatility of 3.32%. This indicates that FGQD.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FUSA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FGQD.L | FUSA.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.88% | 3.32% | -1.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.37% | 7.90% | -1.53% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.89% | 10.99% | -2.10% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.07% | 14.33% | -2.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.61% | 16.94% | -2.33% |
FGQD.L vs. FUSA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
FGQD.L has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than FUSA.L's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
FGQD.L vs. FUSA.L - Dividend Comparison
FGQD.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.81%, while FUSA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FGQD.L Fidelity Global Quality Income ETF | 1.81% | 1.87% | 2.31% | 2.78% | 2.69% | 2.46% | 2.60% | 2.44% | 2.70% | 1.56% |
FUSA.L Fidelity US Quality Income ETF Acc | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FGQD.L and FUSA.L have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FUSA.L is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FUSA.L is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for FGQD.L.
FGQD.L is categorized as Global Equities, while FUSA.L is Dividend. FGQD.L tracks Fidelity Global Quality Income index, while FUSA.L tracks Fidelity US Quality Income Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for FGQD.L and 0.25% for FUSA.L.
Find the right allocation for FGQD.L and FUSA.L
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