FQAL vs. GSG
FQAL (Fidelity Quality Factor ETF) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - FQAL is a Quality Factor fund tracking the Fidelity U.S. Quality Factor Index, while GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FQAL returned 11.85%/yr vs 14.20%/yr for GSG. Their 0.20 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. FQAL charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.
Performance
FQAL vs. GSG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FQAL achieves a 12.51% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 32.52% return.
FQAL
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 3.40%
- 6M
- 12.25%
- YTD
- 12.51%
- 1Y
- 20.74%
- 3Y*
- 19.74%
- 5Y*
- 11.85%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 14.75%
GSG
- 1D
- 0.36%
- 1M
- 5.78%
- 6M
- 21.95%
- YTD
- 32.52%
- 1Y
- 37.47%
- 3Y*
- 12.51%
- 5Y*
- 14.20%
- 10Y*
- 8.03%
- ALL TIME*
- -2.36%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $4.28M | $3.44M | $3.28M | |
| $18.96M | $16.42M | $22.87M |
FQAL vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FQAL Fidelity Quality Factor ETF | 12.51% | 16.93% | 21.92% | 24.20% | -19.70% | 32.13% | 16.17% | 28.12% | -4.39% | 23.03% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 32.52% | 5.93% | 8.52% | -5.51% | 24.08% | 38.77% | -23.94% | 15.62% | -13.88% | 3.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between FQAL and GSG is -0.23, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.23 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.02 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.11 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2016 | 0.20 |
The correlation between FQAL and GSG shifts across timeframes, from -0.23 (1 year) to 0.20 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
FQAL vs. GSG — Risk / Return Rank
FQAL
GSG
FQAL vs. GSG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) and iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG). 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 | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.27 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.45 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.27 | +0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.47 | 2.00 | +0.47 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.93 | 6.32 | +4.61 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FQAL vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FQAL drawdown since its inception was -33.71%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FQAL and GSG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FQAL | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.71% | -89.62% | +55.91% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.43% | -18.81% | +10.38% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.87% | -18.81% | +1.94% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.50% | -29.12% | +3.62% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -57.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -59.99% | +59.99% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.53% | -63.67% | +59.14% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.90% | 5.94% | -4.04% |
Volatility
FQAL vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) is 3.08%, while iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) has a volatility of 8.99%. This indicates that FQAL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FQAL | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.08% | 8.99% | -5.91% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.03% | 21.89% | -12.86% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.55% | 24.44% | -12.89% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.23% | 22.90% | -6.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.49% | 22.08% | -4.59% |
FQAL vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison
FQAL has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
FQAL vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison
FQAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%, while GSG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FQAL Fidelity Quality Factor ETF | 1.12% | 1.12% | 1.20% | 1.35% | 1.52% | 1.17% | 1.46% | 1.55% | 1.73% | 1.53% | 0.43% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FQAL and GSG have a correlation of -0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSG has higher volatility (8.99%) compared to FQAL (3.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FQAL dropped -33.71% vs GSG's -89.62%.
On 5-year performance, GSG leads with 14.20% vs 11.85% for FQAL. On fees, FQAL is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, FQAL has been the lower-risk option at 3.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, GSG has performed better with a 14.20% return vs 11.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FQAL is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GSG.
FQAL has the higher dividend yield at 1.12%, compared with 0.00% for GSG.
FQAL is categorized as Quality Factor, while GSG is Commodities. FQAL tracks Fidelity U.S. Quality Factor Index, while GSG tracks S&P GSCI Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for FQAL and 0.75% for GSG.
FQAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.81 vs 1.54), 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 FQAL and GSG
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