FLCGX vs. FLMFX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

FLCGX (Meeder Quantex Fund) and FLMFX (Meeder Muirfield Fund) are both mutual funds - FLCGX is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund managed by Meeder Funds, while FLMFX is a Tactical Allocation fund managed by Meeder Funds. Over the past 10 years, FLCGX returned 10.62%/yr vs 11.87%/yr for FLMFX. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FLCGX charges 1.62%/yr vs 1.20%/yr for FLMFX.

Performance

FLCGX vs. FLMFX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Meeder Quantex Fund (FLCGX) and Meeder Muirfield Fund (FLMFX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLCGX achieves a 8.59% return, which is significantly lower than FLMFX's 10.71% return. Over the past 10 years, FLCGX has underperformed FLMFX with an annualized return of 10.62%, while FLMFX has yielded a comparatively higher 11.87% annualized return.

FLCGX

• 1D: -0.70%
• 1M: 3.88%
• YTD: 8.59%
• 6M: 8.37%
• 1Y: 24.13%
• 3Y*: 25.84%
• 5Y*: 11.32%
• 10Y*: 10.62%

FLMFX

• 1D: -0.63%
• 1M: 3.27%
• YTD: 10.71%
• 6M: 11.27%
• 1Y: 26.52%
• 3Y*: 23.56%
• 5Y*: 13.37%
• 10Y*: 11.87%

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

FLCGX vs. FLMFX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLCGX Meeder Quantex Fund	8.59%	19.10%	36.38%	14.81%	-13.77%	27.27%	-5.36%	18.48%	-12.35%	13.42%
FLMFX Meeder Muirfield Fund	10.71%	15.28%	36.53%	13.79%	-11.16%	20.18%	4.36%	13.52%	-3.65%	20.30%

Correlation

The correlation between FLCGX and FLMFX is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.98
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.95
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.92
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 11, 1988	0.84

The correlation between FLCGX and FLMFX shifts across timeframes, from 0.84 (all time) to 0.98 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FLCGX vs. FLMFX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLCGX

FLCGX Risk / Return Rank: 50
FLCGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
FLCGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
FLCGX Omega Ratio Rank: 45
FLCGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
FLCGX Martin Ratio Rank: 61

FLMFX

FLMFX Risk / Return Rank: 59
FLMFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
FLMFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
FLMFX Omega Ratio Rank: 54
FLMFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
FLMFX Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

FLCGX vs. FLMFX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Meeder Quantex Fund (FLCGX) and Meeder Muirfield Fund (FLMFX). 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.

	FLCGX	FLMFX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.00	2.22	-0.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.77	3.07	-0.30
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.40	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.75	2.88	-0.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.85	12.60	-0.75
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FLCGX vs. FLMFX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLCGX Sharpe Ratio is 2.00, which is comparable to the FLMFX Sharpe Ratio of 2.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLCGX and FLMFX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FLCGX	FLMFX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.00	2.22	-0.23
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.51	0.92	-0.42
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.45	0.85	-0.39
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.37	0.64	-0.28

Drawdowns

FLCGX vs. FLMFX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLCGX drawdown since its inception was -66.94%, which is greater than FLMFX's maximum drawdown of -42.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLCGX and FLMFX.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLCGX	FLMFX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-66.94%	-42.42%	-24.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.86%	-9.26%	+0.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.47%	-16.08%	-1.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-32.83%	-18.19%	-14.64%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-50.45%	-24.33%	-26.12%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.70%	-0.63%	-0.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.88%	-9.26%	-3.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.05%	2.11%	-0.06%

Volatility

FLCGX vs. FLMFX - Volatility Comparison

Meeder Quantex Fund (FLCGX) and Meeder Muirfield Fund (FLMFX) have volatilities of 3.27% and 3.34%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLCGX	FLMFX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.27%	3.34%	-0.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.33%	9.17%	+0.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.22%	11.99%	+0.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.38%	14.54%	+7.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.47%	14.06%	+9.41%

FLCGX vs. FLMFX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLCGX has a 1.62% expense ratio, which is higher than FLMFX's 1.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLCGX vs. FLMFX - Dividend Comparison

FLCGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.77%, more than FLMFX's 4.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLCGX Meeder Quantex Fund	7.77%	8.48%	39.58%	1.17%	2.73%	16.70%	0.53%	0.67%	0.00%	2.92%	2.00%	17.06%
FLMFX Meeder Muirfield Fund	4.93%	5.55%	31.99%	2.83%	2.76%	3.39%	0.58%	2.69%	1.50%	8.25%	0.72%	2.72%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLCGX and FLMFX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.98, FLCGX and FLMFX move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, FLCGX or FLMFX?

FLMFX has higher volatility (3.34%) compared to FLCGX (3.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLCGX dropped -66.94% vs FLMFX's -42.42%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLMFX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.22 vs 2.00), 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.