FMAG vs. FTGS

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

FMAG (Fidelity Magellan ETF) and FTGS (First Trust Growth Strength ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FMAG is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while FTGS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the The Growth Strength Index - Benchmark TR Gross. FMAG is actively managed, while FTGS is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FMAG returned 19.25%/yr vs 17.12%/yr for FTGS. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FMAG charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for FTGS.

Performance

FMAG vs. FTGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Magellan ETF (FMAG) and First Trust Growth Strength ETF (FTGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FMAG achieves a 4.69% return, which is significantly higher than FTGS's 2.79% return.

FMAG

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: -2.24%
• YTD: 4.69%
• 6M: 3.18%
• 1Y: 6.98%
• 3Y*: 19.25%
• 5Y*: 10.30%
• 10Y*: —

FTGS

• 1D: -0.76%
• 1M: -1.74%
• YTD: 2.79%
• 6M: 1.16%
• 1Y: 8.76%
• 3Y*: 17.12%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FMAG vs. FTGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FMAG Fidelity Magellan ETF	4.69%	10.40%	28.52%	31.25%	-0.40%
FTGS First Trust Growth Strength ETF	2.79%	12.78%	15.76%	33.69%	1.09%

Correlation

The correlation between FMAG and FTGS is 0.77, 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	0.77
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 26, 2022	0.86

The correlation between FMAG and FTGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

FMAG vs. FTGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FMAG	FTGS
Technology	42.7%	32.6%
Industrials	15.7%	11.2%
Consumer Cyclical	12.9%	13.2%
Financial Services	12.2%	15.3%
Communication Services	5.6%	6.1%
Healthcare	4.0%	17.5%
Basic Materials	4.0%	1.9%
Utilities	2.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	1.7%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.3%	-
Energy	-	4.8%

Return for Risk

FMAG vs. FTGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

FMAG

FMAG Risk / Return Rank: 16
FMAG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
FMAG Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
FMAG Omega Ratio Rank: 15
FMAG Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
FMAG Martin Ratio Rank: 18

FTGS

FTGS Risk / Return Rank: 21
FTGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 20
FTGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
FTGS Omega Ratio Rank: 18
FTGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
FTGS Martin Ratio Rank: 25

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.

FMAG vs. FTGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Magellan ETF (FMAG) and First Trust Growth Strength ETF (FTGS). 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.

	FMAG	FTGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.46	0.66	-0.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.74	1.01	-0.28
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.12	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.50	0.93	-0.43
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.74	3.08	-1.34

FMAG vs. FTGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FMAG Sharpe Ratio is 0.46, which is lower than the FTGS Sharpe Ratio of 0.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FMAG and FTGS, 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

FMAG vs. FTGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FMAG drawdown since its inception was -32.93%, which is greater than FTGS's maximum drawdown of -19.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMAG and FTGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	FMAG	FTGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.93%	-19.99%	-12.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.97%	-9.47%	-4.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.12%	-19.99%	-0.13%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-32.93%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.77%	-3.94%	+0.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.91%	-2.75%	-6.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.02%	2.85%	+1.17%

Volatility

FMAG vs. FTGS - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Magellan ETF (FMAG) has a higher volatility of 6.66% compared to First Trust Growth Strength ETF (FTGS) at 4.33%. This indicates that FMAG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FTGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FMAG	FTGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.66%	4.33%	+2.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.71%	10.63%	+2.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.32%	13.36%	+1.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.02%	17.11%	+2.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.76%	17.11%	+2.65%

FMAG vs. FTGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

FMAG has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than FTGS's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

FMAG vs. FTGS - Dividend Comparison

FMAG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.08%, less than FTGS's 0.09% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FMAG Fidelity Magellan ETF	0.08%	0.09%	0.15%	0.34%	0.23%	0.03%
FTGS First Trust Growth Strength ETF	0.09%	0.16%	0.39%	0.62%	0.21%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FMAG and FTGS in my portfolio?

FMAG and FTGS have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FMAG or FTGS?

FMAG has higher volatility (6.66%) compared to FTGS (4.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FMAG dropped -32.93% vs FTGS's -19.99%.

Which ETF is better, FMAG or FTGS?

On 3-year performance, FMAG leads with 19.25% vs 17.12% for FTGS. On fees, FMAG is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, FTGS has been the lower-risk option at 4.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FMAG or FTGS?

Over the 3-year period, FMAG has performed better with a 19.25% return vs 17.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FMAG or FTGS?

FMAG is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FTGS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FMAG or FTGS?

FMAG and FTGS have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.08%.

What is the main difference between FMAG and FTGS?

FMAG is categorized as Global Equities, while FTGS is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for FMAG and 0.60% for FTGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FTGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.66 vs 0.46), 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.