FMCX vs. EQL

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

FMCX (FMC Excelsior Focus Equity ETF) and EQL (ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. FMCX is actively managed, while EQL is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FMCX returned 13.63%/yr vs 14.59%/yr for EQL. Their correlation of 0.81 means they have usually moved in the same direction. FMCX charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.27%/yr for EQL.

Performance

FMCX vs. EQL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FMC Excelsior Focus Equity ETF (FMCX) and ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FMCX achieves a 5.31% return, which is significantly lower than EQL's 10.71% return.

FMCX

• 1D: 1.75%
• 1M: -2.27%
• 6M: 4.73%
• YTD: 5.31%
• 1Y: 8.77%
• 3Y*: 13.63%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.19%

EQL

• 1D: 0.57%
• 1M: 0.31%
• 6M: 6.82%
• YTD: 10.71%
• 1Y: 18.34%
• 3Y*: 14.59%
• 5Y*: 10.63%
• 10Y*: 12.39%
• ALL TIME*: 13.49%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
EQL ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF	$3.33M	$2.84M	$2.70M
FMCX FMC Excelsior Focus Equity ETF	$7.95K	$4.71K	$31.84K

FMCX vs. EQL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FMCX FMC Excelsior Focus Equity ETF	5.31%	11.31%	19.10%	21.94%	-11.16%
EQL ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF	10.71%	13.09%	16.44%	16.87%	-7.60%

Correlation

The correlation between FMCX and EQL is 0.65, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.65
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 25, 2022	0.81

The correlation between FMCX and EQL shifts across timeframes, from 0.65 (1 year) to 0.81 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FMCX vs. EQL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FMCX	EQL
Technology	31.2%	10.2%
Industrials	21.3%	9.3%
Consumer Cyclical	15.5%	9.6%
Financial Services	13.6%	9.1%
Healthcare	9.3%	9.4%
Communication Services	5.3%	8.9%
Basic Materials	3.8%	8.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	8.8%
Energy	-	8.7%
Real Estate	-	8.7%
Utilities	-	9.4%

Return for Risk

FMCX vs. EQL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FMCX

FMCX Risk / Return Rank: 24
FMCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
FMCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
FMCX Omega Ratio Rank: 23
FMCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
FMCX Martin Ratio Rank: 26

EQL

EQL Risk / Return Rank: 79
EQL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
EQL Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
EQL Omega Ratio Rank: 78
EQL Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
EQL Martin Ratio Rank: 82

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FMCX vs. EQL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FMC Excelsior Focus Equity ETF (FMCX) and ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL). 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.

	FMCX	EQL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.56	1.82	-1.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.90	2.54	-1.64
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	1.33	-0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.61	2.78	-2.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.04	10.89	-8.85

FMCX vs. EQL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FMCX Sharpe Ratio is 0.56, which is lower than the EQL Sharpe Ratio of 1.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FMCX and EQL, 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

FMCX vs. EQL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FMCX drawdown since its inception was -17.70%, smaller than the maximum EQL drawdown of -35.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMCX and EQL.

Drawdown Indicators

	FMCX	EQL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.70%	-35.65%	+17.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.59%	-6.19%	-6.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.70%	-15.07%	-2.63%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.24%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.65%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.80%	-0.27%	-2.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.23%	-3.23%	-1.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.79%	1.58%	+2.21%

Volatility

FMCX vs. EQL - Volatility Comparison

FMC Excelsior Focus Equity ETF (FMCX) has a higher volatility of 4.34% compared to ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL) at 2.23%. This indicates that FMCX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EQL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FMCX	EQL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.34%	2.23%	+2.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.29%	7.03%	+4.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.87%	9.50%	+4.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.19%	14.51%	+1.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.19%	16.49%	-0.30%

FMCX vs. EQL - Expense Ratio Comparison

FMCX has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than EQL's 0.27% expense ratio.

Dividends

FMCX vs. EQL - Dividend Comparison

FMCX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.29%, less than EQL's 1.35% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EQL ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF	1.35%	1.73%	1.78%	1.96%	2.14%	1.69%	2.29%	1.95%	2.39%	1.97%	2.89%	2.07%
FMCX FMC Excelsior Focus Equity ETF	0.29%	0.35%	2.12%	1.34%	1.19%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FMCX and EQL in my portfolio?

FMCX and EQL have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FMCX or EQL?

FMCX has higher volatility (4.34%) compared to EQL (2.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FMCX dropped -17.70% vs EQL's -35.65%.

Which ETF is better, FMCX or EQL?

On 3-year performance, EQL leads with 14.59% vs 13.63% for FMCX. On fees, EQL is cheaper at 0.27% per year. On volatility, EQL has been the lower-risk option at 2.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FMCX or EQL?

Over the 3-year period, EQL has performed better with a 14.59% return vs 13.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FMCX or EQL?

EQL is cheaper with a 0.27% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for FMCX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FMCX or EQL?

EQL has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 0.29% for FMCX.

What is the main difference between FMCX and EQL?

They also come from different issuers: First Manhattan and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for FMCX and 0.27% for EQL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EQL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.82 vs 0.56), 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.