FNX vs. FFSM

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

FNX (First Trust Mid Cap Core AlphaDEX Fund) and FFSM (Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. FNX is passively managed, while FFSM is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, FNX returned 8.91%/yr vs 11.30%/yr for FFSM. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. FNX charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.43%/yr for FFSM.

Performance

FNX vs. FFSM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Mid Cap Core AlphaDEX Fund (FNX) and Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF (FFSM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FNX achieves a 15.76% return, which is significantly lower than FFSM's 24.27% return.

FNX

• 1D: 0.99%
• 1M: 3.25%
• YTD: 15.76%
• 6M: 13.36%
• 1Y: 29.74%
• 3Y*: 17.67%
• 5Y*: 8.91%
• 10Y*: 13.03%

FFSM

• 1D: 1.47%
• 1M: 5.22%
• YTD: 24.27%
• 6M: 21.19%
• 1Y: 43.07%
• 3Y*: 22.71%
• 5Y*: 11.30%
• 10Y*: —

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

FNX vs. FFSM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FNX First Trust Mid Cap Core AlphaDEX Fund	15.76%	9.87%	12.21%	20.39%	-13.57%	17.87%
FFSM Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF	24.27%	14.89%	14.38%	17.30%	-16.35%	20.44%

Correlation

The correlation between FNX and FFSM is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.95
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 4, 2021	0.96

The correlation between FNX and FFSM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNX vs. FFSM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FNX	FFSM
Financial Services	18.7%	22.7%
Industrials	18.2%	29.5%
Consumer Cyclical	15.4%	12.2%
Technology	13.3%	14.0%
Healthcare	10.1%	9.1%
Real Estate	7.1%	0.0%
Energy	5.7%	2.2%
Basic Materials	3.2%	6.2%
Consumer Defensive	3.2%	2.3%
Utilities	2.8%	1.8%
Communication Services	2.4%	-

Return for Risk

FNX vs. FFSM — Risk / Return Rank

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

FNX

FNX Risk / Return Rank: 66
FNX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
FNX Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
FNX Omega Ratio Rank: 58
FNX Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
FNX Martin Ratio Rank: 70

FFSM

FFSM Risk / Return Rank: 84
FFSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
FFSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
FFSM Omega Ratio Rank: 78
FFSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
FFSM Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

FNX vs. FFSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Mid Cap Core AlphaDEX Fund (FNX) and Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF (FFSM). 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.

	FNX	FFSM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.83	2.32	-0.49
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.65	3.21	-0.55
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.40	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.23	4.17	-0.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.12	16.79	-5.67

FNX vs. FFSM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNX Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is comparable to the FFSM Sharpe Ratio of 2.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNX and FFSM, 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

FNX vs. FFSM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNX drawdown since its inception was -57.11%, which is greater than FFSM's maximum drawdown of -26.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNX and FFSM.

Drawdown Indicators

	FNX	FFSM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-57.11%	-26.65%	-30.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.24%	-10.37%	+1.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.97%	-24.78%	-0.19%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.97%	-26.65%	+1.68%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-43.95%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.38%	-7.78%	-0.60%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.68%	2.57%	+0.11%

Volatility

FNX vs. FFSM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Mid Cap Core AlphaDEX Fund (FNX) is 4.45%, while Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF (FFSM) has a volatility of 6.31%. This indicates that FNX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FFSM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FNX	FFSM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.45%	6.31%	-1.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.71%	14.69%	-2.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.38%	18.64%	-2.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.51%	20.77%	-0.26%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.95%	20.61%	+1.34%

FNX vs. FFSM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNX has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than FFSM's 0.43% expense ratio.

Dividends

FNX vs. FFSM - Dividend Comparison

FNX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.99%, more than FFSM's 0.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FFSM Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF	0.43%	0.56%	0.62%	0.56%	0.58%	0.37%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FNX First Trust Mid Cap Core AlphaDEX Fund	0.99%	0.88%	1.26%	1.11%	1.19%	0.94%	1.04%	1.21%	1.01%	0.90%	1.07%	1.07%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FNX and FFSM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, FNX and FFSM 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.

Which is riskier, FNX or FFSM?

FFSM has higher volatility (6.31%) compared to FNX (4.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNX dropped -57.11% vs FFSM's -26.65%.

Which ETF is better, FNX or FFSM?

On 5-year performance, FFSM leads with 11.30% vs 8.91% for FNX. On fees, FFSM is cheaper at 0.43% per year. On volatility, FNX has been the lower-risk option at 4.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FNX or FFSM?

Over the 5-year period, FFSM has performed better with a 11.30% return vs 8.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FNX or FFSM?

FFSM is cheaper with a 0.43% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FNX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FNX or FFSM?

FNX has the higher dividend yield at 0.99%, compared with 0.43% for FFSM.

What is the main difference between FNX and FFSM?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for FNX and 0.43% for FFSM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FFSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.32 vs 1.83), 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.