FQAL vs. TDVG
FQAL (Fidelity Quality Factor ETF) and TDVG (T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. FQAL is passively managed, while TDVG is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, FQAL returned 11.74%/yr vs 10.19%/yr for TDVG. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FQAL charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for TDVG.
Performance
FQAL vs. TDVG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FQAL achieves a 6.05% return, which is significantly lower than TDVG's 8.04% return.
FQAL
- 1D
- -0.86%
- 1M
- -0.99%
- YTD
- 6.05%
- 6M
- 4.85%
- 1Y
- 19.02%
- 3Y*
- 18.84%
- 5Y*
- 11.74%
- 10Y*
- —
TDVG
- 1D
- -0.55%
- 1M
- 1.22%
- YTD
- 8.04%
- 6M
- 7.41%
- 1Y
- 17.57%
- 3Y*
- 15.55%
- 5Y*
- 10.19%
- 10Y*
- —
FQAL vs. TDVG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FQAL Fidelity Quality Factor ETF | 6.05% | 16.93% | 21.92% | 24.20% | -19.70% | 32.13% | 12.60% |
TDVG T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF | 8.04% | 14.80% | 13.45% | 13.95% | -10.15% | 26.20% | 12.97% |
Correlation
The correlation between FQAL and TDVG is 0.83, 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 | 0.83 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.86 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 5, 2020 | 0.91 |
The correlation between FQAL and TDVG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
FQAL vs. TDVG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FQAL
TDVG
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Utilities
Technology
FQAL
TDVG
Financial Services
FQAL
TDVG
Communication Services
FQAL
TDVG
Consumer Cyclical
FQAL
TDVG
Industrials
FQAL
TDVG
Healthcare
FQAL
TDVG
Consumer Defensive
FQAL
TDVG
Energy
FQAL
TDVG
Basic Materials
FQAL
TDVG
Real Estate
FQAL
TDVG
Utilities
FQAL
TDVG
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. TDVG — Risk / Return Rank
FQAL
TDVG
FQAL vs. TDVG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) and T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF (TDVG). 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 | TDVG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.15 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.24 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.32 | -0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.27 | 2.44 | -0.17 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.13 | 10.01 | +0.12 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FQAL vs. TDVG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FQAL drawdown since its inception was -33.71%, which is greater than TDVG's maximum drawdown of -19.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FQAL and TDVG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FQAL | TDVG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.71% | -19.20% | -14.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.43% | -7.24% | -1.19% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.87% | -14.02% | -2.85% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.50% | -19.20% | -6.30% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.19% | -0.82% | -1.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.57% | -3.73% | -0.84% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.88% | 1.76% | +0.12% |
Volatility
FQAL vs. TDVG - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity Quality Factor ETF (FQAL) has a higher volatility of 3.75% compared to T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF (TDVG) at 2.78%. This indicates that FQAL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TDVG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FQAL | TDVG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.75% | 2.78% | +0.97% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.06% | 7.61% | +1.45% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.54% | 9.79% | +1.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.23% | 13.92% | +2.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.57% | 13.90% | +3.67% |
FQAL vs. TDVG - Expense Ratio Comparison
FQAL has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than TDVG's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
FQAL vs. TDVG - Dividend Comparison
FQAL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.19%, more than TDVG's 0.98% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
TDVG T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF | 0.98% | 1.00% | 1.06% | 1.31% | 1.15% | 0.80% | 0.40% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FQAL and TDVG have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FQAL has higher volatility (3.75%) compared to TDVG (2.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FQAL dropped -33.71% vs TDVG's -19.20%.
On 5-year performance, FQAL leads with 11.74% vs 10.19% for TDVG. On fees, FQAL is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, TDVG has been the lower-risk option at 2.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FQAL has performed better with a 11.74% return vs 10.19%. 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 0.50% for TDVG.
FQAL has the higher dividend yield at 1.19%, compared with 0.98% for TDVG.
They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and T. Rowe Price. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for FQAL and 0.50% for TDVG.
TDVG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.81 vs 1.66), 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 TDVG
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