FMAT vs. WOOD
FMAT (Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF) and WOOD (iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF) are both Materials funds - FMAT tracks the MSCI USA IMI Materials Index while WOOD tracks the S&P Global Timber & Forestry Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FMAT returned 10.45%/yr vs 5.97%/yr for WOOD. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FMAT charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.46%/yr for WOOD.
Performance
FMAT vs. WOOD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FMAT achieves a 11.09% return, which is significantly higher than WOOD's -7.28% return. Over the past 10 years, FMAT has outperformed WOOD with an annualized return of 10.45%, while WOOD has yielded a comparatively lower 5.97% annualized return.
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%
WOOD
- 1D
- -1.42%
- 1M
- 1.59%
- YTD
- -7.28%
- 6M
- -6.36%
- 1Y
- -6.77%
- 3Y*
- -0.01%
- 5Y*
- -3.45%
- 10Y*
- 5.97%
FMAT vs. WOOD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
WOOD iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF | -7.28% | -3.27% | -4.21% | 13.84% | -19.39% | 17.03% | 20.36% | 19.75% | -17.73% | 34.49% |
Correlation
The correlation between FMAT and WOOD is 0.72, 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 | 0.72 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.70 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.75 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2013 | 0.74 |
The correlation between FMAT and WOOD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.
FMAT vs. WOOD - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FMAT
WOOD
Basic Materials
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Technology
-
Industrials
-
Communication Services
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
-
Basic Materials
FMAT
WOOD
Consumer Cyclical
FMAT
WOOD
Energy
FMAT
WOOD
-
Healthcare
FMAT
WOOD
-
Consumer Defensive
FMAT
WOOD
-
Technology
FMAT
WOOD
-
Industrials
FMAT
WOOD
-
Communication Services
FMAT
-
WOOD
-
Financial Services
FMAT
-
WOOD
-
Real Estate
FMAT
-
WOOD
Utilities
FMAT
-
WOOD
-
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. WOOD — Risk / Return Rank
FMAT
WOOD
FMAT vs. WOOD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) and iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF (WOOD). 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 | WOOD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.48 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.20 | 0.96 | +0.24 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.53 | -0.31 | +1.84 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.86 | -0.67 | +5.52 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FMAT vs. WOOD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FMAT drawdown since its inception was -41.11%, smaller than the maximum WOOD drawdown of -63.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMAT and WOOD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FMAT | WOOD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -41.11% | -63.25% | +22.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.48% | -21.64% | +8.16% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.17% | -22.79% | -0.38% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.40% | -30.71% | +5.31% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -41.11% | -50.20% | +9.09% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.63% | -24.58% | +18.95% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.87% | -14.79% | +7.92% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.24% | 10.14% | -5.90% |
Volatility
FMAT vs. WOOD - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) has a higher volatility of 6.66% compared to iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF (WOOD) at 5.12%. This indicates that FMAT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than WOOD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FMAT | WOOD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.66% | 5.12% | +1.54% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.85% | 14.22% | +0.63% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.48% | 18.90% | -0.42% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.69% | 19.74% | -0.05% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.22% | 21.76% | -0.54% |
FMAT vs. WOOD - Expense Ratio Comparison
FMAT has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than WOOD's 0.46% expense ratio.
Dividends
FMAT vs. WOOD - Dividend Comparison
FMAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.43%, less than WOOD's 2.55% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
WOOD iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF | 2.55% | 2.51% | 2.09% | 1.64% | 2.26% | 1.24% | 0.98% | 1.85% | 2.82% | 1.19% | 1.65% | 2.04% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FMAT and WOOD have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FMAT has higher volatility (6.66%) compared to WOOD (5.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FMAT dropped -41.11% vs WOOD's -63.25%.
On 10-year performance, FMAT leads with 10.45% vs 5.97% for WOOD. On fees, FMAT is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, WOOD has been the lower-risk option at 5.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, FMAT has performed better with a 10.45% return vs 5.97%. 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 0.46% for WOOD.
WOOD has the higher dividend yield at 2.55%, compared with 1.43% for FMAT.
FMAT tracks MSCI USA IMI Materials Index, while WOOD tracks S&P Global Timber & Forestry Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for FMAT and 0.46% for WOOD.
FMAT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.12 vs -0.36), 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.
Find the right allocation for FMAT and WOOD
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