PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FMAT vs. VAW
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FMAT vs. VAW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) and Vanguard Materials ETF (VAW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with FMAT having a 11.09% return and VAW slightly lower at 11.07%. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with FMAT having a 10.45% annualized return and VAW not far ahead at 10.46%.


FMAT

1D
-1.81%
1M
0.83%
YTD
11.09%
6M
9.58%
1Y
20.54%
3Y*
11.22%
5Y*
6.71%
10Y*
10.45%

VAW

1D
-1.83%
1M
0.83%
YTD
11.07%
6M
9.68%
1Y
20.68%
3Y*
11.22%
5Y*
6.68%
10Y*
10.46%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FMAT vs. VAW - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FMAT
Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF
11.09%12.11%0.47%13.71%-11.54%27.45%19.57%23.35%-17.40%23.51%
VAW
Vanguard Materials ETF
11.07%12.30%0.48%13.67%-11.80%27.43%19.44%23.53%-17.49%23.76%

Correlation

The correlation between FMAT and VAW is 1.00 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.00

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

1.00

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.00

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.00

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2013

0.99

The correlation between FMAT and VAW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.99 to 1.00 - a consistent structural relationship.

FMAT vs. VAW - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FMAT
VAW

Basic Materials

89.8%
90.1%

Consumer Cyclical

8.6%
8.3%

Energy

0.5%
0.0%

Healthcare

0.5%
0.5%

Consumer Defensive

0.1%
0.0%

Technology

0.1%
0.1%

Industrials

0.1%
1.1%

Communication Services

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Basic Materials

FMAT
89.8%
VAW
90.1%

Consumer Cyclical

FMAT
8.6%
VAW
8.3%

Energy

FMAT
0.5%
VAW
0.0%

Healthcare

FMAT
0.5%
VAW
0.5%

Consumer Defensive

FMAT
0.1%
VAW
0.0%

Technology

FMAT
0.1%
VAW
0.1%

Industrials

FMAT
0.1%
VAW
1.1%

Communication Services

FMAT

-

VAW

-

Financial Services

FMAT

-

VAW

-

Real Estate

FMAT

-

VAW

-

Utilities

FMAT

-

VAW

-

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. VAW — Risk / Return Rank

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

FMAT
FMAT Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
FMAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3232
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FMAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
FMAT Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
FMAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
FMAT Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
Martin Ratio Rank

VAW
VAW Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
VAW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3232
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VAW Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
VAW Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
VAW Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
VAW Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
Martin Ratio Rank
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. VAW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) and Vanguard Materials ETF (VAW). 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.


FMATVAWDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.01

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.20

1.20

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.53

1.55

-0.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.86

4.90

-0.05

FMAT vs. VAW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FMAT Sharpe Ratio is 1.12, which is comparable to the VAW Sharpe Ratio of 1.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FMAT and VAW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

FMAT vs. VAW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FMAT drawdown since its inception was -41.11%, smaller than the maximum VAW drawdown of -62.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMAT and VAW.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FMATVAWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.11%

-62.17%

+21.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.48%

-13.42%

-0.06%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.17%

-23.21%

+0.04%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.40%

-25.50%

+0.10%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.11%

-41.13%

+0.02%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.63%

-5.58%

-0.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.87%

-9.62%

+2.75%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.24%

4.23%

+0.01%

Volatility

FMAT vs. VAW - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) and Vanguard Materials ETF (VAW) have volatilities of 6.66% and 6.78%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FMATVAWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.66%

6.78%

-0.12%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.85%

14.86%

-0.01%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.48%

18.50%

-0.02%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.69%

19.72%

-0.03%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.22%

21.23%

-0.01%

FMAT vs. VAW - Expense Ratio Comparison

FMAT has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than VAW's 0.09% 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. VAW - Dividend Comparison

FMAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.43%, more than VAW's 1.39% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FMAT
Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF
1.43%1.64%1.68%1.71%2.00%1.44%1.73%1.89%2.18%1.53%1.78%2.16%
VAW
Vanguard Materials ETF
1.39%1.55%1.70%1.72%1.98%1.44%1.67%1.94%2.03%1.63%1.67%2.30%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 1.00, FMAT and VAW move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

VAW has higher volatility (6.78%) compared to FMAT (6.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FMAT dropped -41.11% vs VAW's -62.17%.

On 10-year performance, VAW leads with 10.46% vs 10.45% for FMAT. On fees, FMAT is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, FMAT has been the lower-risk option at 6.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, VAW has performed better with a 10.46% return vs 10.45%. 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 0.09% for VAW.

FMAT has the higher dividend yield at 1.43%, compared with 1.39% for VAW.

FMAT tracks MSCI USA IMI Materials Index, while VAW tracks MSCI US Investable Market Materials 25/50 Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for FMAT and 0.09% for VAW.

VAW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.13 vs 1.12), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FMAT and VAW

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