FSCS vs. VO

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

FSCS (First Trust SMID Capital Strength ETF) and VO (Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds - FSCS tracks the SMID Capital Strength Index while VO tracks the CRSP US Mid Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FSCS returned 6.11%/yr vs 7.68%/yr for VO. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FSCS charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for VO.

Performance

FSCS vs. VO - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FSCS achieves a 2.47% return, which is significantly lower than VO's 10.84% return.

FSCS

• 1D: 1.07%
• 1M: 2.48%
• YTD: 2.47%
• 6M: 0.63%
• 1Y: 2.92%
• 3Y*: 11.03%
• 5Y*: 6.11%
• 10Y*: —

VO

• 1D: 0.44%
• 1M: 2.61%
• YTD: 10.84%
• 6M: 9.30%
• 1Y: 17.12%
• 3Y*: 16.43%
• 5Y*: 7.68%
• 10Y*: 11.98%

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

FSCS vs. VO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FSCS First Trust SMID Capital Strength ETF	2.47%	1.77%	14.98%	16.81%	-9.11%	26.08%	5.71%	28.00%	-12.85%	11.41%
VO Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF	10.84%	11.62%	15.31%	16.03%	-18.73%	24.70%	18.10%	30.98%	-9.24%	9.40%

Correlation

The correlation between FSCS and VO is 0.76, 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	0.76
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 Jun 22, 2017	0.83

The correlation between FSCS and VO shifts across timeframes, from 0.76 (1 year) to 0.88 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FSCS vs. VO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FSCS	VO
Financial Services	25.7%	12.5%
Industrials	23.8%	17.7%
Consumer Defensive	12.9%	4.7%
Consumer Cyclical	11.9%	8.6%
Technology	5.9%	20.8%
Healthcare	5.0%	7.5%
Real Estate	5.0%	5.1%
Basic Materials	3.0%	4.0%
Energy	3.0%	7.9%
Communication Services	2.0%	3.0%
Utilities	1.0%	7.9%

Return for Risk

FSCS vs. VO — Risk / Return Rank

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

FSCS

FSCS Risk / Return Rank: 12
FSCS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 12
FSCS Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
FSCS Omega Ratio Rank: 11
FSCS Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
FSCS Martin Ratio Rank: 12

VO

VO Risk / Return Rank: 44
VO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
VO Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
VO Omega Ratio Rank: 39
VO Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
VO Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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. VO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	FSCS	VO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.23	1.35	-1.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.45	1.94	-1.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.05	1.24	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.38	2.11	-1.73
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.78	7.94	-7.15

FSCS vs. VO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FSCS Sharpe Ratio is 0.23, which is lower than the VO Sharpe Ratio of 1.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FSCS and VO, 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

FSCS vs. VO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FSCS drawdown since its inception was -43.57%, smaller than the maximum VO drawdown of -58.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSCS and VO.

Drawdown Indicators

	FSCS	VO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-43.57%	-58.87%	+15.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.81%	-8.17%	+0.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.55%	-19.02%	-0.53%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.25%	-27.57%	+6.32%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.37%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.55%	-0.85%	-2.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.98%	-7.84%	+1.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.75%	2.16%	+1.59%

Volatility

FSCS vs. VO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust SMID Capital Strength ETF (FSCS) is 3.14%, while Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF (VO) has a volatility of 4.41%. This indicates that FSCS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FSCS	VO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.14%	4.41%	-1.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.44%	9.84%	-1.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.57%	12.78%	-0.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.05%	17.66%	+0.39%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.15%	18.93%	+2.22%

FSCS vs. VO - Expense Ratio Comparison

FSCS has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than VO's 0.03% expense ratio.

Dividends

FSCS vs. VO - Dividend Comparison

FSCS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.88%, less than VO's 1.35% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FSCS First Trust SMID Capital Strength ETF	0.88%	0.75%	1.12%	1.47%	1.71%	1.21%	1.33%	1.68%	1.67%	0.67%	0.00%	0.00%
VO Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF	1.35%	1.52%	1.49%	1.52%	1.60%	1.12%	1.45%	1.48%	1.82%	1.35%	1.45%	1.47%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FSCS and VO in my portfolio?

FSCS and VO have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FSCS or VO?

VO has higher volatility (4.41%) compared to FSCS (3.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FSCS dropped -43.57% vs VO's -58.87%.

Which ETF is better, FSCS or VO?

On 5-year performance, VO leads with 7.68% vs 6.11% for FSCS. On fees, VO is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, FSCS has been the lower-risk option at 3.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FSCS or VO?

Over the 5-year period, VO has performed better with a 7.68% return vs 6.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FSCS or VO?

VO is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FSCS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FSCS or VO?

VO has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 0.88% for FSCS.

What is the main difference between FSCS and VO?

FSCS tracks SMID Capital Strength Index, while VO tracks CRSP US Mid Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for FSCS and 0.03% for VO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

VO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.35 vs 0.23), 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.