FSMD vs. FLCH
FSMD (Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF) and FLCH (Franklin FTSE China ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FSMD is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor Index, while FLCH is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China RIC Capped Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FSMD returned 9.34%/yr vs -5.25%/yr for FLCH. At a 0.41 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FSMD charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for FLCH.
Performance
FSMD vs. FLCH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FSMD achieves a 13.60% return, which is significantly higher than FLCH's -9.50% return.
FSMD
- 1D
- 0.40%
- 1M
- 0.04%
- YTD
- 13.60%
- 6M
- 13.89%
- 1Y
- 23.49%
- 3Y*
- 16.61%
- 5Y*
- 9.34%
- 10Y*
- —
FLCH
- 1D
- -0.60%
- 1M
- -8.03%
- YTD
- -9.50%
- 6M
- -11.21%
- 1Y
- 2.19%
- 3Y*
- 8.94%
- 5Y*
- -5.25%
- 10Y*
- —
FSMD vs. FLCH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FSMD Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF | 13.60% | 8.70% | 15.18% | 17.37% | -11.15% | 26.40% | 8.94% | 8.81% |
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF | -9.50% | 32.55% | 18.00% | -11.21% | -22.74% | -20.87% | 30.09% | 6.95% |
Correlation
The correlation between FSMD and FLCH is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 1, 2019 | 0.41 |
FSMD vs. FLCH - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FSMD
FLCH
Industrials
Technology
Financial Services
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Energy
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Utilities
Industrials
FSMD
FLCH
Technology
FSMD
FLCH
Financial Services
FSMD
FLCH
Healthcare
FSMD
FLCH
Consumer Cyclical
FSMD
FLCH
Real Estate
FSMD
FLCH
Energy
FSMD
FLCH
Basic Materials
FSMD
FLCH
Consumer Defensive
FSMD
FLCH
Communication Services
FSMD
FLCH
Utilities
FSMD
FLCH
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
FSMD vs. FLCH — Risk / Return Rank
FSMD
FLCH
FSMD vs. FLCH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF (FSMD) and Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH). 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.
| FSMD | FLCH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.42 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.94 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.04 | +0.24 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.80 | 0.13 | +2.67 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.05 | 0.29 | +9.76 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FSMD | FLCH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.53 | 0.11 | +1.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.51 | -0.18 | +0.69 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.54 | 0.00 | +0.54 |
Drawdowns
FSMD vs. FLCH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FSMD drawdown since its inception was -40.67%, smaller than the maximum FLCH drawdown of -62.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSMD and FLCH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FSMD | FLCH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -40.67% | -62.09% | +21.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.44% | -17.14% | +8.70% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.16% | -25.43% | +3.27% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.16% | -55.78% | +33.62% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.60% | -36.20% | +34.60% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.00% | -30.54% | +24.54% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.34% | 7.58% | -5.24% |
Volatility
FSMD vs. FLCH - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF (FSMD) is 4.25%, while Franklin FTSE China ETF (FLCH) has a volatility of 6.46%. This indicates that FSMD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLCH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FSMD | FLCH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.25% | 6.46% | -2.21% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.55% | 13.88% | -2.33% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.40% | 19.31% | -3.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.50% | 29.61% | -11.11% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.42% | 27.91% | -6.49% |
FSMD vs. FLCH - Expense Ratio Comparison
FSMD has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is higher than FLCH's 0.19% expense ratio.
Dividends
FSMD vs. FLCH - Dividend Comparison
FSMD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.22%, less than FLCH's 2.61% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLCH Franklin FTSE China ETF | 2.61% | 2.36% | 2.87% | 3.47% | 2.69% | 1.48% | 0.91% | 1.98% | 1.92% | 0.01% |
FSMD Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF | 1.22% | 1.33% | 1.29% | 1.37% | 1.54% | 1.18% | 1.32% | 1.37% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FSMD and FLCH have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FLCH has higher volatility (6.46%) compared to FSMD (4.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FSMD dropped -40.67% vs FLCH's -62.09%.
On 5-year performance, FSMD leads with 9.34% vs -5.25% for FLCH. On fees, FLCH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, FSMD has been the lower-risk option at 4.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FSMD has performed better with a 9.34% return vs -5.25%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FLCH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for FSMD.
FLCH has the higher dividend yield at 2.61%, compared with 1.22% for FSMD.
FSMD is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while FLCH is China Equities. FSMD tracks Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor Index, while FLCH tracks FTSE China RIC Capped Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for FSMD and 0.19% for FLCH.
FSMD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.53 vs 0.11), 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 FSMD and FLCH
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