FSST vs. TGRW

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FSST (Fidelity Sustainability U.S. Equity ETF) and TGRW (T. Rowe Price Growth Stock ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FSST is a Sustainable fund tracking the Russell 3000, while TGRW is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by T. Rowe Price. FSST is passively managed, while TGRW is actively managed. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FSST charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for TGRW.

Performance

FSST vs. TGRW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Sustainability U.S. Equity ETF (FSST) and T. Rowe Price Growth Stock ETF (TGRW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

FSST

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

TGRW

• 1D: -1.34%
• 1M: -3.27%
• YTD: 0.74%
• 6M: -0.34%
• 1Y: 15.30%
• 3Y*: 19.72%
• 5Y*: 7.54%
• 10Y*: —

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

FSST vs. TGRW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FSST Fidelity Sustainability U.S. Equity ETF	0.00%	15.40%	21.40%	25.49%	-18.30%	12.52%
TGRW T. Rowe Price Growth Stock ETF	0.74%	15.62%	29.94%	48.87%	-38.42%	7.09%

Correlation

The correlation between FSST and TGRW is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.45
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.75
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 17, 2021	0.83

Over the past year, the correlation between FSST and TGRW has dropped to 0.45 - well below their long-term average of 0.83, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

FSST vs. TGRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FSST	TGRW
Technology	29.6%	52.6%
Industrials	13.0%	4.1%
Financial Services	12.1%	5.2%
Communication Services	11.7%	16.5%
Consumer Cyclical	11.5%	13.1%
Healthcare	10.2%	6.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	0.8%
Basic Materials	3.4%	0.6%
Energy	1.9%	-
Real Estate	1.3%	0.6%
Utilities	0.9%	-

Return for Risk

FSST vs. TGRW — Risk / Return Rank

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

FSST

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

TGRW

TGRW Risk / Return Rank: 23
TGRW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
TGRW Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
TGRW Omega Ratio Rank: 24
TGRW Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
TGRW Martin Ratio Rank: 22

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.

FSST vs. TGRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Sustainability U.S. Equity ETF (FSST) and T. Rowe Price Growth Stock ETF (TGRW). 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.

	FSST	TGRW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	0.88	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	1.30	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.16	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	0.82	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	2.53	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	FSST	TGRW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	—	-43.33%	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-18.84%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-23.18%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-43.33%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	—	-6.51%	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	—	-12.40%	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	6.05%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	FSST	TGRW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	6.40%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	13.54%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	17.40%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	23.40%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	23.04%	—

FSST vs. TGRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

FSST has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than TGRW's 0.52% expense ratio.

Dividends

FSST vs. TGRW - Dividend Comparison

Neither FSST nor TGRW has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FSST Fidelity Sustainability U.S. Equity ETF	0.10%	0.19%	2.01%	0.68%	1.00%	0.34%	0.00%
TGRW T. Rowe Price Growth Stock ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.01%	0.00%	0.40%	0.21%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FSST and TGRW in my portfolio?

FSST and TGRW have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, FSST or TGRW?

On fees, TGRW is cheaper at 0.52% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, FSST or TGRW?

TGRW is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for FSST.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FSST or TGRW?

FSST has the higher dividend yield at 0.10%, compared with 0.00% for TGRW.

What is the main difference between FSST and TGRW?

FSST is categorized as Sustainable, while TGRW is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and T. Rowe Price. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for FSST and 0.52% for TGRW.