FMAT vs. GNR

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

FMAT (Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF) and GNR (SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FMAT is a Materials fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Materials Index, while GNR is a Natural Resources fund tracking the S&P Global Natural Resources Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FMAT returned 11.05%/yr vs 10.53%/yr for GNR. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FMAT charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for GNR.

Performance

FMAT vs. GNR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) and SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR). 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 GNR's 10.29% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with FMAT having a 11.05% annualized return and GNR not far behind at 10.53%.

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%

GNR

• 1D: 0.91%
• 1M: -7.46%
• YTD: 10.29%
• 6M: 9.86%
• 1Y: 30.14%
• 3Y*: 12.05%
• 5Y*: 8.64%
• 10Y*: 10.53%

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

FMAT vs. GNR - 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%
GNR SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF	10.29%	28.68%	-8.27%	2.95%	10.20%	24.73%	-0.03%	16.49%	-13.19%	22.64%

Correlation

The correlation between FMAT and GNR 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	0.73
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.77
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2013	0.79

The correlation between FMAT and GNR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

FMAT vs. GNR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FMAT	GNR
Basic Materials	89.8%	52.1%
Consumer Cyclical	8.6%	6.7%
Energy	0.5%	35.4%
Healthcare	0.5%	0.0%
Consumer Defensive	0.1%	4.7%
Technology	0.1%	-
Industrials	0.1%	0.2%
Communication Services	-	-
Financial Services	-	0.0%
Real Estate	-	0.8%
Utilities	-	0.0%

Return for Risk

FMAT vs. GNR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FMAT

FMAT Risk / Return Rank: 38
FMAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
FMAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
FMAT Omega Ratio Rank: 36
FMAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
FMAT Martin Ratio Rank: 39

GNR

GNR Risk / Return Rank: 62
GNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
GNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
GNR Omega Ratio Rank: 57
GNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
GNR Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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. GNR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) and SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR). 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	GNR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.24	1.74	-0.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.80	2.30	-0.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.31	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.70	2.88	-1.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.38	11.79	-6.41

FMAT vs. GNR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FMAT Sharpe Ratio is 1.24, which is comparable to the GNR Sharpe Ratio of 1.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FMAT and GNR, 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

FMAT vs. GNR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FMAT drawdown since its inception was -41.11%, smaller than the maximum GNR drawdown of -51.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMAT and GNR.

Drawdown Indicators

	FMAT	GNR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.11%	-51.37%	+10.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.48%	-10.50%	-2.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.17%	-21.15%	-2.02%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.40%	-25.66%	+0.26%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.11%	-48.59%	+7.48%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.97%	-9.68%	+5.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.87%	-14.92%	+8.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.26%	2.56%	+1.70%

Volatility

FMAT vs. GNR - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) has a higher volatility of 6.60% compared to SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) at 6.13%. This indicates that FMAT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GNR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FMAT	GNR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.60%	6.13%	+0.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.85%	14.15%	+0.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.47%	17.38%	+1.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.70%	20.29%	-0.59%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.22%	21.81%	-0.59%

FMAT vs. GNR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FMAT has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than GNR's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

FMAT vs. GNR - Dividend Comparison

FMAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.40%, less than GNR's 2.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
GNR SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF	2.69%	2.76%	4.73%	3.37%	4.37%	3.44%	2.78%	3.84%	3.51%	2.40%	2.06%	4.59%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FMAT and GNR in my portfolio?

FMAT and GNR 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.

Which is riskier, FMAT or GNR?

FMAT has higher volatility (6.60%) compared to GNR (6.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FMAT dropped -41.11% vs GNR's -51.37%.

Which ETF is better, FMAT or GNR?

On 10-year performance, FMAT leads with 11.05% vs 10.53% for GNR. On fees, FMAT is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, GNR has been the lower-risk option at 6.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FMAT or GNR?

Over the 10-year period, FMAT has performed better with a 11.05% return vs 10.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FMAT or GNR?

FMAT is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for GNR.

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

GNR has the higher dividend yield at 2.69%, compared with 1.40% for FMAT.

What is the main difference between FMAT and GNR?

FMAT is categorized as Materials, while GNR is Natural Resources. FMAT tracks MSCI USA IMI Materials Index, while GNR tracks S&P Global Natural Resources Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for FMAT and 0.40% for GNR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.74 vs 1.24), 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.