FMAT vs. CUT
FMAT (Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF) and CUT (Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF) are both Materials funds - FMAT tracks the MSCI USA IMI Materials Index while CUT tracks the Beacon Global Timber Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FMAT returned 11.05%/yr vs 5.30%/yr for CUT. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FMAT charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for CUT.
Performance
FMAT vs. CUT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FMAT achieves a 13.04% return, which is significantly higher than CUT's -2.47% return. Over the past 10 years, FMAT has outperformed CUT with an annualized return of 11.05%, while CUT has yielded a comparatively lower 5.30% annualized return.
FMAT
- 1D
- 1.41%
- 1M
- 0.95%
- YTD
- 13.04%
- 6M
- 11.40%
- 1Y
- 22.86%
- 3Y*
- 11.49%
- 5Y*
- 7.08%
- 10Y*
- 11.05%
CUT
- 1D
- 1.36%
- 1M
- 4.17%
- YTD
- -2.47%
- 6M
- -1.79%
- 1Y
- -2.45%
- 3Y*
- 1.96%
- 5Y*
- -3.09%
- 10Y*
- 5.30%
FMAT vs. CUT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF | 13.04% | 12.11% | 0.47% | 13.71% | -11.54% | 27.45% | 19.57% | 23.35% | -17.40% | 23.51% |
CUT Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF | -2.47% | -5.92% | 1.82% | 8.65% | -16.38% | 12.29% | 18.05% | 23.35% | -21.70% | 30.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between FMAT and CUT is 0.74, 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 | 0.74 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.75 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.80 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.81 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2013 | 0.80 |
The correlation between FMAT and CUT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.
FMAT vs. CUT - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FMAT
CUT
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Consumer Defensive
Technology
Industrials
Communication Services
-
-
Financial Services
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
-
Basic Materials
FMAT
CUT
Consumer Cyclical
FMAT
CUT
Energy
FMAT
CUT
-
Healthcare
FMAT
CUT
-
Consumer Defensive
FMAT
CUT
Technology
FMAT
CUT
Industrials
FMAT
CUT
Communication Services
FMAT
-
CUT
-
Financial Services
FMAT
-
CUT
Real Estate
FMAT
-
CUT
Utilities
FMAT
-
CUT
-
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
FMAT vs. CUT — Risk / Return Rank
FMAT
CUT
FMAT vs. CUT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) and Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF (CUT). 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.
| FMAT | CUT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.37 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.86 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.22 | 0.99 | +0.22 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.70 | -0.13 | +1.83 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.38 | -0.25 | +5.63 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FMAT vs. CUT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FMAT drawdown since its inception was -41.11%, smaller than the maximum CUT drawdown of -70.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMAT and CUT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FMAT | CUT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -41.11% | -70.03% | +28.92% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.48% | -19.62% | +6.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.17% | -22.23% | -0.94% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.40% | -30.40% | +5.00% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -41.11% | -45.76% | +4.65% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.97% | -20.46% | +16.49% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.87% | -15.28% | +8.41% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.26% | 9.63% | -5.37% |
Volatility
FMAT vs. CUT - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) has a higher volatility of 6.60% compared to Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF (CUT) at 5.42%. This indicates that FMAT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CUT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FMAT | CUT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.60% | 5.42% | +1.18% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.85% | 14.41% | +0.44% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.47% | 18.96% | -0.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.70% | 18.54% | +1.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.22% | 20.12% | +1.10% |
FMAT vs. CUT - Expense Ratio Comparison
FMAT has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than CUT's 0.55% expense ratio.
Dividends
FMAT vs. CUT - Dividend Comparison
FMAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.40%, less than CUT's 2.52% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CUT Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF | 2.52% | 2.46% | 3.05% | 2.44% | 2.58% | 1.57% | 1.65% | 2.67% | 3.43% | 1.57% | 2.08% | 1.52% |
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF | 1.40% | 1.64% | 1.68% | 1.71% | 2.00% | 1.44% | 1.73% | 1.89% | 2.18% | 1.53% | 1.78% | 2.16% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FMAT and CUT have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FMAT has higher volatility (6.60%) compared to CUT (5.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FMAT dropped -41.11% vs CUT's -70.03%.
On 10-year performance, FMAT leads with 11.05% vs 5.30% for CUT. On fees, FMAT is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, CUT has been the lower-risk option at 5.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, FMAT has performed better with a 11.05% return vs 5.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FMAT is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CUT.
CUT has the higher dividend yield at 2.52%, compared with 1.40% for FMAT.
FMAT tracks MSCI USA IMI Materials Index, while CUT tracks Beacon Global Timber Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for FMAT and 0.55% for CUT.
FMAT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.24 vs -0.13), 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.
Find the right allocation for FMAT and CUT
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