FQAL vs. ILCG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FQAL (Fidelity Quality Factor ETF) and ILCG (iShares Morningstar Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - FQAL tracks the Fidelity U.S. Quality Factor Index while ILCG tracks the Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FQAL returned 11.74%/yr vs 12.71%/yr for ILCG. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FQAL charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for ILCG.

Performance

FQAL vs. ILCG - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FQAL achieves a 6.05% return, which is significantly lower than ILCG's 9.21% return.

FQAL

• 1D: -0.86%
• 1M: -0.99%
• YTD: 6.05%
• 6M: 4.85%
• 1Y: 19.02%
• 3Y*: 18.84%
• 5Y*: 11.74%
• 10Y*: —

ILCG

• 1D: -2.86%
• 1M: -1.80%
• YTD: 9.21%
• 6M: 7.82%
• 1Y: 22.02%
• 3Y*: 23.80%
• 5Y*: 12.71%
• 10Y*: 18.10%

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

FQAL vs. ILCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FQAL Fidelity Quality Factor ETF	6.05%	16.93%	21.92%	24.20%	-19.70%	32.13%	16.17%	28.12%	-4.39%	23.03%
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF	9.21%	16.71%	32.82%	40.41%	-31.75%	24.33%	38.56%	33.22%	2.06%	30.57%

Correlation

The correlation between FQAL and ILCG is 0.88, 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	0.88
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.89
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2016	0.90

The correlation between FQAL and ILCG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

FQAL vs. ILCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FQAL	ILCG
Technology	37.7%	53.1%
Financial Services	11.6%	5.5%
Communication Services	10.0%	13.5%
Consumer Cyclical	9.2%	10.1%
Industrials	8.8%	7.7%
Healthcare	8.7%	5.2%
Consumer Defensive	4.3%	1.4%
Energy	3.5%	0.4%
Basic Materials	2.1%	1.0%
Real Estate	2.1%	1.3%
Utilities	2.0%	0.7%

Return for Risk

FQAL vs. ILCG — 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: 48
FQAL Martin Ratio Rank: 59

ILCG

ILCG Risk / Return Rank: 34
ILCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
ILCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
ILCG Omega Ratio Rank: 36
ILCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
ILCG Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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. ILCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG). 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	ILCG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.66	1.25	+0.41
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.36	1.72	+0.64
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.23	+0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.27	1.41	+0.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.13	4.86	+5.27

FQAL vs. ILCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FQAL Sharpe Ratio is 1.66, which is higher than the ILCG Sharpe Ratio of 1.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FQAL and ILCG, 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. ILCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FQAL drawdown since its inception was -33.71%, smaller than the maximum ILCG drawdown of -52.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FQAL and ILCG.

Drawdown Indicators

	FQAL	ILCG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.71%	-52.98%	+19.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.43%	-15.65%	+7.22%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.87%	-23.10%	+6.23%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.50%	-35.38%	+9.88%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.38%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.19%	-5.58%	+3.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.57%	-8.21%	+3.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.88%	4.54%	-2.66%

Volatility

FQAL vs. ILCG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) is 3.75%, while iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) has a volatility of 7.83%. This indicates that FQAL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ILCG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FQAL	ILCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.75%	7.83%	-4.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.06%	14.51%	-5.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.54%	17.70%	-6.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.23%	22.22%	-5.99%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.57%	21.63%	-4.06%

FQAL vs. ILCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FQAL has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is higher than ILCG's 0.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

FQAL vs. ILCG - Dividend Comparison

FQAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.19%, more than ILCG's 0.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%	0.00%
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF	0.42%	0.47%	0.50%	0.69%	0.75%	0.34%	0.28%	0.54%	0.81%	0.89%	0.95%	0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FQAL and ILCG in my portfolio?

FQAL and ILCG have a correlation of 0.88, 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 ILCG?

ILCG has higher volatility (7.83%) compared to FQAL (3.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FQAL dropped -33.71% vs ILCG's -52.98%.

Which ETF is better, FQAL or ILCG?

On 5-year performance, ILCG leads with 12.71% vs 11.74% for FQAL. On fees, ILCG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, FQAL has been the lower-risk option at 3.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FQAL or ILCG?

Over the 5-year period, ILCG has performed better with a 12.71% return vs 11.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FQAL or ILCG?

ILCG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for FQAL.

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

FQAL has the higher dividend yield at 1.19%, compared with 0.42% for ILCG.

What is the main difference between FQAL and ILCG?

FQAL tracks Fidelity U.S. Quality Factor Index, while ILCG tracks Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for FQAL and 0.04% for ILCG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FQAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.66 vs 1.25), 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.