FMAT vs. XLB
Compare and contrast key facts about Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) and Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLB).
FMAT and XLB are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. FMAT is a passively managed fund by Fidelity that tracks the performance of the MSCI USA IMI Materials Index. It was launched on Oct 21, 2013. XLB is a passively managed fund by State Street that tracks the performance of the Materials Select Sector Index. It was launched on Dec 16, 1998. Both FMAT and XLB are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: FMAT or XLB.
Correlation
The correlation between FMAT and XLB is 0.98, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
FMAT vs. XLB - Performance Comparison
Key characteristics
FMAT:
0.22
XLB:
0.22
FMAT:
0.40
XLB:
0.39
FMAT:
1.05
XLB:
1.05
FMAT:
0.26
XLB:
0.22
FMAT:
0.91
XLB:
0.83
FMAT:
3.52%
XLB:
3.57%
FMAT:
14.41%
XLB:
13.58%
FMAT:
-41.11%
XLB:
-59.83%
FMAT:
-11.42%
XLB:
-12.34%
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FMAT achieves a 1.45% return, which is significantly higher than XLB's 1.34% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with FMAT having a 7.79% annualized return and XLB not far ahead at 7.84%.
FMAT
1.45%
-7.73%
-1.74%
2.01%
9.43%
7.79%
XLB
1.34%
-8.54%
-3.65%
1.26%
9.09%
7.84%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
FMAT vs. XLB - Expense Ratio Comparison
FMAT has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than XLB's 0.13% 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%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
FMAT vs. XLB - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) and Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLB). 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.
Dividends
FMAT vs. XLB - Dividend Comparison
FMAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.66%, more than XLB's 1.37% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF | 1.66% | 1.71% | 2.00% | 1.44% | 1.73% | 1.89% | 2.18% | 1.53% | 1.78% | 2.16% | 1.65% | 0.39% |
XLB Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF | 1.37% | 2.00% | 2.26% | 1.62% | 1.72% | 1.98% | 2.20% | 1.66% | 1.95% | 2.24% | 1.97% | 2.08% |
Drawdowns
FMAT vs. XLB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FMAT drawdown since its inception was -41.11%, smaller than the maximum XLB drawdown of -59.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMAT and XLB. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
FMAT vs. XLB - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) and Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLB) have volatilities of 4.53% and 4.39%, 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.