PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FSGS vs. FYC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FSGS vs. FYC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS) and First Trust Small Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund (FYC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FSGS achieves a 7.00% return, which is significantly lower than FYC's 23.54% return.


FSGS

1D
0.07%
1M
1.26%
6M
5.01%
YTD
7.00%
1Y
8.44%
3Y*
6.45%
5Y*
4.12%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
7.41%

FYC

1D
-0.59%
1M
-3.95%
6M
18.84%
YTD
23.54%
1Y
52.40%
3Y*
23.62%
5Y*
11.25%
10Y*
14.06%
ALL TIME*
12.46%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$29.24K$24.14K$76.25K
$11.77M$9.10M$7.44M

FSGS vs. FYC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FSGS
First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF
7.00%2.41%6.38%15.98%-13.17%25.56%10.26%21.31%-11.92%10.39%
FYC
First Trust Small Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund
23.54%24.24%23.99%14.52%-25.86%21.64%32.34%16.79%-5.54%12.34%

Correlation

The correlation between FSGS and FYC is 0.76, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.76

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.84

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2017

0.78

The correlation between FSGS and FYC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

FSGS vs. FYC - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FSGS
FYC

Industrials

22.9%
17.6%

Financial Services

19.7%
8.9%

Healthcare

17.8%
27.2%

Technology

17.5%
17.5%

Consumer Cyclical

7.8%
9.4%

Consumer Defensive

5.1%
2.9%

Energy

3.8%
2.1%

Communication Services

2.8%
3.8%

Basic Materials

1.7%
3.6%

Real Estate

0.9%
5.4%

Utilities

-

1.5%

Industrials

FSGS
22.9%
FYC
17.6%

Financial Services

FSGS
19.7%
FYC
8.9%

Healthcare

FSGS
17.8%
FYC
27.2%

Technology

FSGS
17.5%
FYC
17.5%

Consumer Cyclical

FSGS
7.8%
FYC
9.4%

Consumer Defensive

FSGS
5.1%
FYC
2.9%

Energy

FSGS
3.8%
FYC
2.1%

Communication Services

FSGS
2.8%
FYC
3.8%

Basic Materials

FSGS
1.7%
FYC
3.6%

Real Estate

FSGS
0.9%
FYC
5.4%

Utilities

FSGS

-

FYC
1.5%

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

FSGS vs. FYC — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FSGS
FSGS Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
FSGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2222
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FSGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 2222
Sortino Ratio Rank
FSGS Omega Ratio Rank: 2020
Omega Ratio Rank
FSGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
FSGS Martin Ratio Rank: 2424
Martin Ratio Rank

FYC
FYC Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
FYC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FYC Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
FYC Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
FYC Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
FYC Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FSGS vs. FYC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS) and First Trust Small Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund (FYC). 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.


FSGSFYCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.78

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.30

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.09

1.36

-0.27

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.63

4.66

-4.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.75

14.97

-13.22

FSGS vs. FYC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FSGS Sharpe Ratio is 0.47, which is lower than the FYC Sharpe Ratio of 2.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FSGS and FYC, 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...

Drawdowns

FSGS vs. FYC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FSGS drawdown since its inception was -43.26%, smaller than the maximum FYC drawdown of -47.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSGS and FYC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FSGSFYCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-43.26%

-47.85%

+4.59%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.31%

-10.48%

-0.83%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.08%

-27.79%

+3.71%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.08%

-35.37%

+11.29%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-47.85%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-6.85%

+6.85%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.93%

-9.59%

+1.66%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.04%

3.26%

+0.78%

Volatility

FSGS vs. FYC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS) is 4.04%, while First Trust Small Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund (FYC) has a volatility of 5.15%. This indicates that FSGS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FYC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FSGSFYCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.04%

5.15%

-1.11%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.00%

16.16%

-5.16%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.17%

21.77%

-6.60%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.98%

23.67%

-3.69%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.67%

24.62%

-1.95%

FSGS vs. FYC - Expense Ratio Comparison

FSGS has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than FYC's 0.71% expense ratio.


Dividends

FSGS vs. FYC - Dividend Comparison

FSGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.03%, less than FYC's 0.17% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FSGS
First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF
0.03%0.00%2.71%2.29%1.95%1.35%1.32%1.77%2.13%1.15%0.00%0.00%
FYC
First Trust Small Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund
0.17%0.08%0.72%0.58%0.00%0.63%0.12%0.39%0.09%0.10%0.31%0.21%

Frequently Asked Questions


FSGS and FYC 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.

FYC has higher volatility (5.15%) compared to FSGS (4.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FSGS dropped -43.26% vs FYC's -47.85%.

On 5-year performance, FYC leads with 11.25% vs 4.12% for FSGS. On fees, FSGS is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, FSGS has been the lower-risk option at 4.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FYC has performed better with a 11.25% return vs 4.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FSGS is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.71% for FYC.

FYC has the higher dividend yield at 0.17%, compared with 0.03% for FSGS.

FSGS tracks SMID Growth Strength Index, while FYC tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX Small Cap Growth Index. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for FSGS and 0.71% for FYC.

FYC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.25 vs 0.47), 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 FSGS and FYC

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