FQAL vs. FDVV

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

FQAL (Fidelity Quality Factor ETF) and FDVV (Fidelity High Dividend ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FQAL is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Fidelity U.S. Quality Factor Index, while FDVV is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Fidelity Core Dividend Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FQAL returned 11.61%/yr vs 13.59%/yr for FDVV. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.29% expense ratio.

Performance

FQAL vs. FDVV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) and Fidelity High Dividend ETF (FDVV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FQAL achieves a 6.12% return, which is significantly lower than FDVV's 8.46% return.

FQAL

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: -0.93%
• YTD: 6.12%
• 6M: 4.60%
• 1Y: 17.84%
• 3Y*: 18.87%
• 5Y*: 11.61%
• 10Y*: —

FDVV

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: 0.49%
• YTD: 8.46%
• 6M: 7.70%
• 1Y: 21.26%
• 3Y*: 19.93%
• 5Y*: 13.59%
• 10Y*: —

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

FQAL vs. FDVV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FQAL Fidelity Quality Factor ETF	6.12%	16.93%	21.92%	24.20%	-19.70%	32.13%	16.17%	28.12%	-4.39%	23.03%
FDVV Fidelity High Dividend ETF	8.46%	17.08%	21.81%	18.00%	-4.21%	29.24%	2.80%	24.07%	-1.26%	14.00%

Correlation

The correlation between FQAL and FDVV is 0.82, 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	0.82
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.86
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2016	0.86

The correlation between FQAL and FDVV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

FQAL vs. FDVV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FQAL	FDVV
Technology	37.7%	30.5%
Financial Services	11.6%	17.0%
Communication Services	10.0%	3.6%
Consumer Cyclical	9.2%	13.6%
Industrials	8.8%	3.0%
Healthcare	8.7%	3.0%
Consumer Defensive	4.3%	10.7%
Energy	3.5%	-
Basic Materials	2.1%	-
Real Estate	2.1%	9.9%
Utilities	2.0%	8.6%

Return for Risk

FQAL vs. FDVV — Risk / Return Rank

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

FQAL

FQAL Risk / Return Rank: 51
FQAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
FQAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
FQAL Omega Ratio Rank: 49
FQAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
FQAL Martin Ratio Rank: 59

FDVV

FDVV Risk / Return Rank: 66
FDVV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
FDVV Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
FDVV Omega Ratio Rank: 74
FDVV Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
FDVV Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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.

FQAL vs. FDVV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) and Fidelity High Dividend ETF (FDVV). 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.

	FQAL	FDVV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.56	2.11	-0.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.23	2.95	-0.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.39	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.13	2.30	-0.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.48	9.49	-0.01

FQAL vs. FDVV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FQAL Sharpe Ratio is 1.56, which is comparable to the FDVV Sharpe Ratio of 2.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FQAL and FDVV, 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

FQAL vs. FDVV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FQAL drawdown since its inception was -33.71%, smaller than the maximum FDVV drawdown of -40.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FQAL and FDVV.

Drawdown Indicators

	FQAL	FDVV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.71%	-40.25%	+6.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.43%	-9.30%	+0.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.87%	-15.90%	-0.97%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.50%	-20.18%	-5.32%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.13%	-1.25%	-0.88%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.57%	-3.79%	-0.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.89%	2.25%	-0.36%

Volatility

FQAL vs. FDVV - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) has a higher volatility of 3.72% compared to Fidelity High Dividend ETF (FDVV) at 2.97%. This indicates that FQAL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FDVV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FQAL	FDVV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.72%	2.97%	+0.75%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.03%	8.25%	+0.78%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.50%	10.14%	+1.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.23%	14.73%	+1.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.56%	16.97%	+0.59%

FQAL vs. FDVV - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FQAL and FDVV have an expense ratio of 0.29%.

Dividends

FQAL vs. FDVV - Dividend Comparison

FQAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.19%, less than FDVV's 2.86% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
FDVV Fidelity High Dividend ETF	2.86%	2.89%	2.94%	3.77%	3.44%	2.70%	3.19%	3.93%	4.05%	3.66%	1.04%
FQAL Fidelity Quality Factor ETF	1.19%	1.12%	1.20%	1.35%	1.52%	1.17%	1.46%	1.55%	1.73%	1.53%	0.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FQAL and FDVV in my portfolio?

FQAL and FDVV have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FQAL or FDVV?

FQAL has higher volatility (3.72%) compared to FDVV (2.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FQAL dropped -33.71% vs FDVV's -40.25%.

Which ETF is better, FQAL or FDVV?

On 5-year performance, FDVV leads with 13.59% vs 11.61% for FQAL. Both ETFs have the same 0.29% expense ratio. On volatility, FDVV has been the lower-risk option at 2.97%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FQAL or FDVV?

Over the 5-year period, FDVV has performed better with a 13.59% return vs 11.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FQAL or FDVV?

FQAL and FDVV have the same expense ratio: 0.29% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FQAL or FDVV?

FDVV has the higher dividend yield at 2.86%, compared with 1.19% for FQAL.

What is the main difference between FQAL and FDVV?

FQAL is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while FDVV is Large Cap Blend Equities. FQAL tracks Fidelity U.S. Quality Factor Index, while FDVV tracks Fidelity Core Dividend Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FDVV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 1.56), 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.