FSMD vs. CGDV

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

FSMD (Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF) and CGDV (Capital Group Dividend Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FSMD is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor Index, while CGDV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Capital Group. FSMD is passively managed, while CGDV is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FSMD returned 17.46%/yr vs 24.15%/yr for CGDV. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FSMD charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for CGDV.

Performance

FSMD vs. CGDV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF (FSMD) and Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FSMD achieves a 17.58% return, which is significantly higher than CGDV's 11.55% return.

FSMD

• 1D: 1.00%
• 1M: 4.76%
• YTD: 17.58%
• 6M: 15.58%
• 1Y: 27.73%
• 3Y*: 17.46%
• 5Y*: 10.00%
• 10Y*: —

CGDV

• 1D: 0.66%
• 1M: 1.57%
• YTD: 11.55%
• 6M: 12.50%
• 1Y: 27.43%
• 3Y*: 24.15%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FSMD vs. CGDV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FSMD Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF	17.58%	8.70%	15.18%	17.37%	-2.49%
CGDV Capital Group Dividend Value ETF	11.55%	25.50%	20.10%	28.81%	-0.44%

Correlation

The correlation between FSMD and CGDV 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	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2022	0.86

The correlation between FSMD and CGDV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

FSMD vs. CGDV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FSMD	CGDV
Industrials	20.7%	13.2%
Technology	18.2%	34.1%
Financial Services	15.4%	6.8%
Healthcare	11.6%	11.5%
Consumer Cyclical	11.1%	10.6%
Real Estate	6.2%	1.1%
Energy	4.6%	3.8%
Basic Materials	3.9%	2.9%
Consumer Defensive	3.3%	5.5%
Communication Services	2.8%	8.4%
Utilities	2.2%	2.1%

Return for Risk

FSMD vs. CGDV — Risk / Return Rank

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

FSMD

FSMD Risk / Return Rank: 66
FSMD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
FSMD Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
FSMD Omega Ratio Rank: 58
FSMD Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
FSMD Martin Ratio Rank: 73

CGDV

CGDV Risk / Return Rank: 78
CGDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
CGDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
CGDV Omega Ratio Rank: 82
CGDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
CGDV Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

FSMD vs. CGDV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF (FSMD) and Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV). 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.

	FSMD	CGDV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.78	2.27	-0.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.58	3.11	-0.53
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.42	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.30	2.83	+0.48
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.89	13.19	-1.30

FSMD vs. CGDV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FSMD Sharpe Ratio is 1.78, which is comparable to the CGDV Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FSMD and CGDV, 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

FSMD vs. CGDV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FSMD drawdown since its inception was -40.67%, which is greater than CGDV's maximum drawdown of -21.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSMD and CGDV.

Drawdown Indicators

	FSMD	CGDV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.67%	-21.82%	-18.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.44%	-9.75%	+1.31%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.16%	-14.28%	-7.88%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.16%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.98%	+0.98%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.98%	-3.60%	-2.38%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.34%	2.09%	+0.25%

Volatility

FSMD vs. CGDV - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF (FSMD) has a higher volatility of 5.14% compared to Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV) at 4.52%. This indicates that FSMD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CGDV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FSMD	CGDV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.14%	4.52%	+0.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.85%	9.80%	+2.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.69%	12.13%	+3.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.55%	15.57%	+2.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.43%	15.57%	+5.86%

FSMD vs. CGDV - Expense Ratio Comparison

FSMD has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than CGDV's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

FSMD vs. CGDV - Dividend Comparison

FSMD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.18%, which matches CGDV's 1.17% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
CGDV Capital Group Dividend Value ETF	1.17%	1.29%	1.60%	1.65%	1.36%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FSMD Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF	1.18%	1.33%	1.29%	1.37%	1.54%	1.18%	1.32%	1.37%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FSMD and CGDV in my portfolio?

FSMD and CGDV 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, FSMD or CGDV?

FSMD has higher volatility (5.14%) compared to CGDV (4.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FSMD dropped -40.67% vs CGDV's -21.82%.

Which ETF is better, FSMD or CGDV?

On 3-year performance, CGDV leads with 24.15% vs 17.46% for FSMD. On fees, FSMD is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, CGDV has been the lower-risk option at 4.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FSMD or CGDV?

Over the 3-year period, CGDV has performed better with a 24.15% return vs 17.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FSMD or CGDV?

FSMD is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.33% for CGDV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FSMD or CGDV?

FSMD and CGDV have nearly identical dividend yields, around 1.18%.

What is the main difference between FSMD and CGDV?

FSMD is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while CGDV is Large Cap Value Equities. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Capital Group. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for FSMD and 0.33% for CGDV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGDV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.27 vs 1.78), 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.