PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FLCC vs. MTUM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FLCC vs. MTUM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Core ETF (FLCC) and iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLCC achieves a 9.74% return, which is significantly lower than MTUM's 30.37% return.


FLCC

1D
-0.12%
1M
3.96%
YTD
9.74%
6M
10.95%
1Y
23.60%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

MTUM

1D
2.87%
1M
14.36%
YTD
30.37%
6M
31.51%
1Y
40.75%
3Y*
34.28%
5Y*
15.20%
10Y*
17.19%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FLCC vs. MTUM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
FLCC
Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Core ETF
9.74%16.61%9.94%
MTUM
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF
30.37%22.15%8.96%

Correlation

The correlation between FLCC and MTUM is 0.80, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.80

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

0.85

The correlation between FLCC and MTUM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

FLCC vs. MTUM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FLCC
MTUM

Technology

35.7%
44.4%

Consumer Cyclical

12.3%
3.6%

Financial Services

10.8%
10.4%

Communication Services

10.2%
7.4%

Healthcare

9.5%
6.9%

Industrials

9.1%
15.6%

Consumer Defensive

4.2%
3.3%

Energy

3.1%
3.5%

Basic Materials

2.3%
1.7%

Utilities

1.4%
1.6%

Real Estate

1.2%
1.8%

Technology

FLCC
35.7%
MTUM
44.4%

Consumer Cyclical

FLCC
12.3%
MTUM
3.6%

Financial Services

FLCC
10.8%
MTUM
10.4%

Communication Services

FLCC
10.2%
MTUM
7.4%

Healthcare

FLCC
9.5%
MTUM
6.9%

Industrials

FLCC
9.1%
MTUM
15.6%

Consumer Defensive

FLCC
4.2%
MTUM
3.3%

Energy

FLCC
3.1%
MTUM
3.5%

Basic Materials

FLCC
2.3%
MTUM
1.7%

Utilities

FLCC
1.4%
MTUM
1.6%

Real Estate

FLCC
1.2%
MTUM
1.8%

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

FLCC vs. MTUM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

FLCC
FLCC Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
FLCC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLCC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLCC Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
FLCC Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLCC Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank

MTUM
MTUM Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
MTUM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MTUM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
MTUM Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
MTUM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
MTUM Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
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.

FLCC vs. MTUM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Core ETF (FLCC) and iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM). 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.


FLCCMTUMDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.87

2.15

-0.28

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.61

2.92

-0.31

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.39

-0.05

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.59

3.63

-1.05

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

10.52

14.50

-3.98

FLCC vs. MTUM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLCC Sharpe Ratio is 1.87, which is comparable to the MTUM Sharpe Ratio of 2.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLCC and MTUM, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FLCCMTUMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.87

2.15

-0.28

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.74

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.82

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.18

0.84

+0.34

Drawdowns

FLCC vs. MTUM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLCC drawdown since its inception was -19.18%, smaller than the maximum MTUM drawdown of -34.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLCC and MTUM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FLCCMTUMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.18%

-34.08%

+14.90%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.31%

-11.54%

+2.23%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.99%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-32.28%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.08%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.12%

0.00%

-0.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.35%

-6.21%

+3.86%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.29%

2.89%

-0.60%

Volatility

FLCC vs. MTUM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Core ETF (FLCC) is 2.54%, while iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM) has a volatility of 7.73%. This indicates that FLCC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MTUM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FLCCMTUMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.54%

7.73%

-5.19%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.51%

16.49%

-6.98%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.66%

19.03%

-6.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.38%

20.59%

-3.21%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.38%

21.04%

-3.66%

FLCC vs. MTUM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLCC has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is higher than MTUM's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

FLCC vs. MTUM - Dividend Comparison

FLCC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.46%, less than MTUM's 0.60% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FLCC
Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Core ETF
0.46%0.50%0.20%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
MTUM
iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF
0.60%0.91%0.75%1.35%1.80%0.55%0.83%1.48%1.27%1.02%1.43%1.12%

Frequently Asked Questions


FLCC and MTUM have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MTUM has higher volatility (7.73%) compared to FLCC (2.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLCC dropped -19.18% vs MTUM's -34.08%.

On 1-year performance, MTUM leads with 40.75% vs 23.60% for FLCC. On fees, MTUM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FLCC has been the lower-risk option at 2.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, MTUM has performed better with a 40.75% return vs 23.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MTUM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for FLCC.

MTUM has the higher dividend yield at 0.60%, compared with 0.46% for FLCC.

FLCC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while MTUM is Momentum. They also come from different issuers: Federated Hermes and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for FLCC and 0.15% for MTUM.

MTUM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.15 vs 1.87), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FLCC and MTUM

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