FMAT vs. DGRW

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FMAT (Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF) and DGRW (WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - FMAT is a Materials fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Materials Index, while DGRW is a Dividend fund tracking the WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FMAT returned 10.33%/yr vs 14.15%/yr for DGRW. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FMAT charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.28%/yr for DGRW.

Performance

FMAT vs. DGRW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) and WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund (DGRW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FMAT achieves a 13.04% return, which is significantly higher than DGRW's 9.10% return. Over the past 10 years, FMAT has underperformed DGRW with an annualized return of 10.33%, while DGRW has yielded a comparatively higher 14.15% annualized return.

FMAT

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: 2.43%
• YTD: 13.04%
• 6M: 16.00%
• 1Y: 22.50%
• 3Y*: 12.38%
• 5Y*: 5.79%
• 10Y*: 10.33%

DGRW

• 1D: -0.83%
• 1M: 4.06%
• YTD: 9.10%
• 6M: 8.62%
• 1Y: 20.79%
• 3Y*: 16.64%
• 5Y*: 12.17%
• 10Y*: 14.15%

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

FMAT vs. DGRW - 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%
DGRW WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund	9.10%	12.17%	16.98%	18.66%	-6.33%	24.46%	13.87%	29.54%	-5.38%	26.90%

Correlation

The correlation between FMAT and DGRW is 0.69, 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	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.75
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.78
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2013	0.79

The correlation between FMAT and DGRW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

FMAT vs. DGRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FMAT	DGRW
Basic Materials	90.1%	3.3%
Consumer Cyclical	8.3%	7.1%
Energy	0.6%	5.0%
Healthcare	0.5%	12.8%
Industrials	0.1%	9.9%
Consumer Defensive	0.1%	6.7%
Technology	0.1%	32.1%
Communication Services	-	10.1%
Financial Services	-	11.3%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	0.2%

Return for Risk

FMAT vs. DGRW — Risk / Return Rank

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

FMAT

FMAT Risk / Return Rank: 34
FMAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
FMAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
FMAT Omega Ratio Rank: 32
FMAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
FMAT Martin Ratio Rank: 35

DGRW

DGRW Risk / Return Rank: 60
DGRW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
DGRW Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
DGRW Omega Ratio Rank: 63
DGRW Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
DGRW Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

FMAT vs. DGRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) and WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund (DGRW). 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.

	FMAT	DGRW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.28	2.12	-0.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.85	3.09	-1.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.39	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.68	2.52	-0.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.51	11.03	-5.52
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FMAT vs. DGRW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FMAT Sharpe Ratio is 1.28, which is lower than the DGRW Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FMAT and DGRW, 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

	FMAT	DGRW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.28	2.12	-0.83
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.30	0.88	-0.58
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.49	0.88	-0.39
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	0.86	-0.41

Drawdowns

FMAT vs. DGRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FMAT drawdown since its inception was -41.11%, which is greater than DGRW's maximum drawdown of -32.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMAT and DGRW.

Drawdown Indicators

	FMAT	DGRW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.11%	-32.04%	-9.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.48%	-8.30%	-5.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.17%	-16.21%	-6.96%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.40%	-17.27%	-8.13%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.11%	-32.04%	-9.07%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.97%	-0.83%	-3.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.87%	-3.01%	-3.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.09%	1.89%	+2.20%

Volatility

FMAT vs. DGRW - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) has a higher volatility of 6.14% compared to WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund (DGRW) at 2.47%. This indicates that FMAT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DGRW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FMAT	DGRW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.14%	2.47%	+3.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.95%	7.64%	+6.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.66%	9.88%	+7.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.60%	13.97%	+5.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.19%	16.21%	+4.98%

FMAT vs. DGRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

FMAT has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than DGRW's 0.28% expense ratio.

Dividends

FMAT vs. DGRW - Dividend Comparison

FMAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.42%, more than DGRW's 1.27% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DGRW WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund	1.27%	1.43%	1.55%	1.74%	2.15%	1.78%	1.93%	2.20%	2.42%	1.71%	2.13%	2.18%
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	1.42%	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

Can I hold both FMAT and DGRW in my portfolio?

FMAT and DGRW have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FMAT or DGRW?

FMAT has higher volatility (6.14%) compared to DGRW (2.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FMAT dropped -41.11% vs DGRW's -32.04%.

Which ETF is better, FMAT or DGRW?

On 10-year performance, DGRW leads with 14.15% vs 10.33% for FMAT. On fees, FMAT is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, DGRW has been the lower-risk option at 2.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FMAT or DGRW?

Over the 10-year period, DGRW has performed better with a 14.15% return vs 10.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FMAT or DGRW?

FMAT is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.28% for DGRW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FMAT or DGRW?

FMAT has the higher dividend yield at 1.42%, compared with 1.27% for DGRW.

What is the main difference between FMAT and DGRW?

FMAT is categorized as Materials, while DGRW is Dividend. FMAT tracks MSCI USA IMI Materials Index, while DGRW tracks WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and WisdomTree. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for FMAT and 0.28% for DGRW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DGRW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.12 vs 1.28), 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.