FSMD vs. VTWG
FSMD (Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF) and VTWG (Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds - FSMD tracks the Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor Index while VTWG tracks the Russell 2000 Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FSMD returned 10.30%/yr vs 5.29%/yr for VTWG. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FSMD charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.06%/yr for VTWG.
Performance
FSMD vs. VTWG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FSMD achieves a 17.21% return, which is significantly lower than VTWG's 20.43% return.
FSMD
- 1D
- -1.31%
- 1M
- 3.70%
- YTD
- 17.21%
- 6M
- 15.00%
- 1Y
- 27.16%
- 3Y*
- 18.35%
- 5Y*
- 10.30%
- 10Y*
- —
VTWG
- 1D
- -1.45%
- 1M
- 4.36%
- YTD
- 20.43%
- 6M
- 16.97%
- 1Y
- 40.10%
- 3Y*
- 19.34%
- 5Y*
- 5.29%
- 10Y*
- 12.12%
FSMD vs. VTWG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FSMD Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF | 17.21% | 8.70% | 15.18% | 17.37% | -11.15% | 26.40% | 8.94% | 8.81% |
VTWG Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF | 20.43% | 13.07% | 15.15% | 18.90% | -26.49% | 2.84% | 34.72% | 8.17% |
Correlation
The correlation between FSMD and VTWG is 0.87, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.91 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2019 | 0.90 |
The correlation between FSMD and VTWG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
FSMD vs. VTWG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FSMD
VTWG
Technology
Industrials
Financial Services
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Real Estate
Energy
Basic Materials
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Utilities
Technology
FSMD
VTWG
Industrials
FSMD
VTWG
Financial Services
FSMD
VTWG
Healthcare
FSMD
VTWG
Consumer Cyclical
FSMD
VTWG
Real Estate
FSMD
VTWG
Energy
FSMD
VTWG
Basic Materials
FSMD
VTWG
Consumer Defensive
FSMD
VTWG
Communication Services
FSMD
VTWG
Utilities
FSMD
VTWG
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. VTWG — Risk / Return Rank
FSMD
VTWG
FSMD vs. VTWG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF (FSMD) and Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF (VTWG). 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 | VTWG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.07 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.05 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.30 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.23 | 2.71 | +0.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.62 | 9.72 | +1.90 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FSMD vs. VTWG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FSMD drawdown since its inception was -40.67%, roughly equal to the maximum VTWG drawdown of -42.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSMD and VTWG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FSMD | VTWG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -40.67% | -42.07% | +1.40% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.44% | -14.88% | +6.44% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.16% | -28.58% | +6.42% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.16% | -40.49% | +18.33% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -42.07% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.31% | -1.45% | +0.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.96% | -10.50% | +4.54% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.34% | 4.14% | -1.80% |
Volatility
FSMD vs. VTWG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF (FSMD) is 5.08%, while Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF (VTWG) has a volatility of 7.82%. This indicates that FSMD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VTWG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FSMD | VTWG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.08% | 7.82% | -2.74% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.00% | 16.92% | -4.92% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.76% | 22.34% | -6.58% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.54% | 24.67% | -6.13% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.41% | 24.27% | -2.86% |
FSMD vs. VTWG - Expense Ratio Comparison
FSMD has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is higher than VTWG's 0.06% expense ratio.
Dividends
FSMD vs. VTWG - Dividend Comparison
FSMD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.24%, more than VTWG's 0.59% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FSMD Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor ETF | 1.24% | 1.33% | 1.29% | 1.37% | 1.54% | 1.18% | 1.32% | 1.37% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
VTWG Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF | 0.59% | 0.64% | 0.55% | 0.79% | 0.71% | 0.54% | 0.48% | 0.72% | 0.72% | 0.64% | 0.96% | 0.72% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FSMD and VTWG have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
VTWG has higher volatility (7.82%) compared to FSMD (5.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FSMD dropped -40.67% vs VTWG's -42.07%.
On 5-year performance, FSMD leads with 10.30% vs 5.29% for VTWG. On fees, VTWG is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, FSMD has been the lower-risk option at 5.08%. 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 10.30% return vs 5.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
VTWG is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for FSMD.
FSMD has the higher dividend yield at 1.24%, compared with 0.59% for VTWG.
FSMD tracks Fidelity Small-Mid Multifactor Index, while VTWG tracks Russell 2000 Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for FSMD and 0.06% for VTWG.
VTWG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.80 vs 1.74), 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 VTWG
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