FMAT vs. GLTR

In the year-to-date period, FMAT achieves a 0.78% return, which is significantly lower than GLTR's 17.12% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with FMAT having a 7.16% annualized return and GLTR not far ahead at 7.29%.

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

FMAT has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than GLTR's 0.60% expense ratio.

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) and Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR). 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.

The current FMAT Sharpe Ratio is -0.26, which is lower than the GLTR Sharpe Ratio of 1.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FMAT and GLTR, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

FMAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.70%, while GLTR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

The maximum FMAT drawdown since its inception was -41.11%, smaller than the maximum GLTR drawdown of -55.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMAT and GLTR. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.

The current volatility for Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) is 5.34%, while Aberdeen Standard Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) has a volatility of 7.19%. This indicates that FMAT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.