FMAT vs. FELG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FMAT (Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF) and FELG (Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FMAT is a Materials fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Materials Index, while FELG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. FMAT is passively managed, while FELG is actively managed. Over the past year, FMAT returned 22.50% vs 27.58% for FELG. At a 0.45 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FMAT charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for FELG.

Performance

FMAT vs. FELG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) and Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG). 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 FELG's 7.70% 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%

FELG

• 1D: -1.12%
• 1M: 5.85%
• YTD: 7.70%
• 6M: 7.23%
• 1Y: 27.58%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FMAT vs. FELG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	13.04%	12.11%	0.47%	8.31%
FELG Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF	7.70%	18.44%	35.45%	4.20%

Correlation

The correlation between FMAT and FELG is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 21, 2023	0.45

FMAT vs. FELG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FMAT	FELG
Basic Materials	90.1%	0.5%
Consumer Cyclical	8.3%	11.5%
Energy	0.6%	1.1%
Healthcare	0.5%	6.3%
Industrials	0.1%	7.2%
Consumer Defensive	0.1%	1.0%
Technology	0.1%	53.9%
Communication Services	-	13.8%
Financial Services	-	4.7%
Real Estate	-	0.0%
Utilities	-	0.1%

Return for Risk

FMAT vs. FELG — 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

FELG

FELG Risk / Return Rank: 44
FELG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
FELG Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
FELG Omega Ratio Rank: 49
FELG Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
FELG Martin Ratio Rank: 37

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. FELG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) and Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG). 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	FELG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.28	1.79	-0.51
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.85	2.45	-0.60
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.31	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.68	1.71	-0.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.51	5.86	-0.35
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. FELG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FMAT Sharpe Ratio is 1.28, which is comparable to the FELG Sharpe Ratio of 1.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FMAT and FELG, 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	FELG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.28	1.79	-0.51
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.30	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.49	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	1.32	-0.88

Drawdowns

FMAT vs. FELG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FMAT drawdown since its inception was -41.11%, which is greater than FELG's maximum drawdown of -23.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMAT and FELG.

Drawdown Indicators

	FMAT	FELG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.11%	-23.89%	-17.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.48%	-16.17%	+2.69%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.17%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.40%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.11%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.97%	-1.34%	-2.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.87%	-3.52%	-3.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.09%	4.72%	-0.63%

Volatility

FMAT vs. FELG - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) has a higher volatility of 6.14% compared to Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF (FELG) at 3.50%. This indicates that FMAT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FELG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FMAT	FELG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.14%	3.50%	+2.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.95%	11.59%	+2.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.66%	15.46%	+2.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.60%	19.89%	-0.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.19%	19.89%	+1.30%

FMAT vs. FELG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FMAT has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than FELG's 0.18% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FMAT vs. FELG - Dividend Comparison

FMAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.42%, more than FELG's 0.34% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FELG Fidelity Enhanced Large Cap Growth ETF	0.34%	0.38%	0.44%	0.11%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
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 FELG in my portfolio?

FMAT and FELG have a correlation of 0.40, 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 FELG?

FMAT has higher volatility (6.14%) compared to FELG (3.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FMAT dropped -41.11% vs FELG's -23.89%.

Which ETF is better, FMAT or FELG?

On 1-year performance, FELG leads with 27.58% vs 22.50% for FMAT. On fees, FMAT is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, FELG has been the lower-risk option at 3.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FMAT or FELG?

Over the 1-year period, FELG has performed better with a 27.58% return vs 22.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FMAT or FELG?

FMAT is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.18% for FELG.

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

FMAT has the higher dividend yield at 1.42%, compared with 0.34% for FELG.

What is the main difference between FMAT and FELG?

FMAT is categorized as Materials, while FELG is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for FMAT and 0.18% for FELG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FELG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.79 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.