PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FSCS vs. FFSM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FSCS vs. FFSM - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FSCS achieves a -1.53% return, which is significantly lower than FFSM's 18.92% return.


FSCS

1D
-0.01%
1M
-1.54%
YTD
-1.53%
6M
-1.11%
1Y
-1.10%
3Y*
9.79%
5Y*
4.93%
10Y*

FFSM

1D
0.16%
1M
3.08%
YTD
18.92%
6M
18.95%
1Y
38.60%
3Y*
21.43%
5Y*
10.37%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FSCS vs. FFSM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
FSCS
First Trust SMID Capital Strength ETF
-1.53%1.77%14.98%16.81%-9.11%21.02%
FFSM
Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF
18.92%14.89%14.38%17.30%-16.35%19.77%

Correlation

The correlation between FSCS and FFSM is 0.72, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.72

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.85

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.89

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2021

0.88

The correlation between FSCS and FFSM shifts across timeframes, from 0.72 (1 year) to 0.89 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FSCS vs. FFSM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FSCS
FFSM

Financial Services

26.6%
22.7%

Industrials

24.4%
29.5%

Consumer Cyclical

12.8%
12.2%

Consumer Defensive

12.6%
2.3%

Real Estate

5.0%
0.0%

Technology

4.8%
14.0%

Healthcare

4.6%
9.1%

Basic Materials

4.0%
6.2%

Energy

3.1%
2.2%

Communication Services

2.0%

-

Utilities

-

1.8%

Financial Services

FSCS
26.6%
FFSM
22.7%

Industrials

FSCS
24.4%
FFSM
29.5%

Consumer Cyclical

FSCS
12.8%
FFSM
12.2%

Consumer Defensive

FSCS
12.6%
FFSM
2.3%

Real Estate

FSCS
5.0%
FFSM
0.0%

Technology

FSCS
4.8%
FFSM
14.0%

Healthcare

FSCS
4.6%
FFSM
9.1%

Basic Materials

FSCS
4.0%
FFSM
6.2%

Energy

FSCS
3.1%
FFSM
2.2%

Communication Services

FSCS
2.0%
FFSM

-

Utilities

FSCS

-

FFSM
1.8%

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

FSCS vs. FFSM — Risk / Return Rank

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

FSCS
FSCS Risk / Return Rank: 88
Overall Rank
FSCS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FSCS Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
Sortino Ratio Rank
FSCS Omega Ratio Rank: 88
Omega Ratio Rank
FSCS Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
Calmar Ratio Rank
FSCS Martin Ratio Rank: 88
Martin Ratio Rank

FFSM
FFSM Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
FFSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FFSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
FFSM Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
FFSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
FFSM Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FSCS vs. FFSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust SMID Capital Strength ETF (FSCS) 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.


FSCSFFSMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.25

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.08

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.00

1.38

-0.38

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.14

3.74

-3.88

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.31

15.16

-15.47

FSCS vs. FFSM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FSCS Sharpe Ratio is -0.09, which is lower than the FFSM Sharpe Ratio of 2.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FSCS 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FSCSFFSMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.09

2.16

-2.25

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.27

0.50

-0.23

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.39

0.59

-0.21

Drawdowns

FSCS vs. FFSM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FSCS drawdown since its inception was -43.57%, which is greater than FFSM's maximum drawdown of -26.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSCS and FFSM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FSCSFFSMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-43.57%

-26.65%

-16.92%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.81%

-10.37%

+2.56%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.55%

-24.78%

+5.23%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.25%

-26.65%

+5.40%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.32%

-0.57%

-6.75%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.99%

-7.86%

+1.87%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.60%

2.55%

+1.05%

Volatility

FSCS vs. FFSM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust SMID Capital Strength ETF (FSCS) is 3.07%, while Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF (FFSM) has a volatility of 5.70%. This indicates that FSCS 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FSCSFFSMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.07%

5.70%

-2.63%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.22%

13.98%

-5.76%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.70%

17.96%

-5.26%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.09%

20.66%

-2.57%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.20%

20.57%

+0.63%

FSCS vs. FFSM - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

FSCS vs. FFSM - Dividend Comparison

FSCS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%, more than FFSM's 0.46% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
FFSM
Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF
0.46%0.56%0.62%0.56%0.58%0.37%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
FSCS
First Trust SMID Capital Strength ETF
0.91%0.75%1.12%1.47%1.71%1.21%1.33%1.68%1.67%0.67%

Frequently Asked Questions


FSCS and FFSM have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FFSM has higher volatility (5.70%) compared to FSCS (3.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FSCS dropped -43.57% vs FFSM's -26.65%.

On 5-year performance, FFSM leads with 10.37% vs 4.93% for FSCS. On fees, FFSM is cheaper at 0.43% per year. On volatility, FSCS has been the lower-risk option at 3.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FFSM has performed better with a 10.37% return vs 4.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

FSCS has the higher dividend yield at 0.91%, compared with 0.46% for FFSM.

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

FFSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs -0.09), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FSCS and FFSM

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