PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FSTA vs. MNA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FSTA vs. MNA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF (FSTA) and IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FSTA achieves a 7.29% return, which is significantly higher than MNA's 1.79% return. Over the past 10 years, FSTA has outperformed MNA with an annualized return of 7.61%, while MNA has yielded a comparatively lower 2.74% annualized return.


FSTA

1D
-0.17%
1M
-2.09%
YTD
7.29%
6M
7.43%
1Y
3.86%
3Y*
8.01%
5Y*
6.56%
10Y*
7.61%

MNA

1D
-0.08%
1M
-0.14%
YTD
1.79%
6M
1.97%
1Y
4.47%
3Y*
5.95%
5Y*
1.83%
10Y*
2.74%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FSTA vs. MNA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FSTA
Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF
7.29%1.82%13.31%2.29%-1.72%17.44%10.96%26.84%-8.49%12.71%
MNA
IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF
1.79%8.59%4.93%0.18%-1.61%-3.24%2.72%4.70%2.13%5.97%

Correlation

The correlation between FSTA and MNA is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.12

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.17

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.27

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.24

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2013

0.26

The correlation between FSTA and MNA shifts across timeframes, from 0.12 (1 year) to 0.27 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FSTA vs. MNA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FSTA
MNA

Consumer Defensive

97.4%
4.4%

Consumer Cyclical

1.7%
2.4%

Industrials

0.3%
22.3%

Basic Materials

0.3%
10.3%

Healthcare

0.0%
11.3%

Communication Services

-

9.2%

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

11.4%

Real Estate

-

5.1%

Technology

-

8.3%

Utilities

-

15.3%

Consumer Defensive

FSTA
97.4%
MNA
4.4%

Consumer Cyclical

FSTA
1.7%
MNA
2.4%

Industrials

FSTA
0.3%
MNA
22.3%

Basic Materials

FSTA
0.3%
MNA
10.3%

Healthcare

FSTA
0.0%
MNA
11.3%

Communication Services

FSTA

-

MNA
9.2%

Energy

FSTA

-

MNA

-

Financial Services

FSTA

-

MNA
11.4%

Real Estate

FSTA

-

MNA
5.1%

Technology

FSTA

-

MNA
8.3%

Utilities

FSTA

-

MNA
15.3%

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

FSTA vs. MNA — Risk / Return Rank

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

FSTA
FSTA Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
FSTA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FSTA Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
FSTA Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
FSTA Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
FSTA Martin Ratio Rank: 1414
Martin Ratio Rank

MNA
MNA Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
MNA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2929
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MNA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
MNA Omega Ratio Rank: 2828
Omega Ratio Rank
MNA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
MNA Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FSTA vs. MNA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF (FSTA) and IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA). 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.


FSTAMNADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.63

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.87

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.06

1.17

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.42

3.22

-2.80

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.85

7.99

-7.15

FSTA vs. MNA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FSTA Sharpe Ratio is 0.31, which is lower than the MNA Sharpe Ratio of 0.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FSTA and MNA, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FSTAMNADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.31

0.95

-0.63

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.50

0.37

+0.13

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.52

0.42

+0.10

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.62

0.36

+0.26

Drawdowns

FSTA vs. MNA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FSTA drawdown since its inception was -25.13%, which is greater than MNA's maximum drawdown of -16.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSTA and MNA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FSTAMNADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-25.13%

-16.68%

-8.45%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.29%

-1.40%

-7.89%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.76%

-3.01%

-8.75%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.58%

-10.45%

-6.13%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.13%

-16.68%

-8.45%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.26%

-0.55%

-6.71%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.56%

-2.83%

-0.73%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.57%

0.56%

+4.01%

Volatility

FSTA vs. MNA - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF (FSTA) has a higher volatility of 4.43% compared to IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA) at 1.66%. This indicates that FSTA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MNA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FSTAMNADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.43%

1.66%

+2.77%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.87%

3.59%

+6.28%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.44%

4.75%

+7.69%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.13%

4.98%

+8.15%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.57%

6.55%

+8.02%

FSTA vs. MNA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FSTA has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than MNA's 0.77% expense ratio.


Dividends

FSTA vs. MNA - Dividend Comparison

FSTA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.22%, while MNA has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FSTA
Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF
2.22%2.34%2.25%2.66%2.26%2.15%2.47%2.46%3.01%2.42%2.53%2.86%
MNA
IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%1.20%0.00%0.00%2.30%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.21%0.87%

Frequently Asked Questions


FSTA and MNA have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FSTA has higher volatility (4.43%) compared to MNA (1.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FSTA dropped -25.13% vs MNA's -16.68%.

On 10-year performance, FSTA leads with 7.61% vs 2.74% for MNA. On fees, FSTA is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, MNA has been the lower-risk option at 1.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FSTA has performed better with a 7.61% return vs 2.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FSTA is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for MNA.

FSTA has the higher dividend yield at 2.22%, compared with 0.00% for MNA.

FSTA is categorized as Consumer Staples Equities, while MNA is Hedge Fund. FSTA tracks MSCI USA IMI Consumer Staples Index, while MNA tracks IQ Merger Arbitrage Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and New York Life. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for FSTA and 0.77% for MNA.

MNA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.95 vs 0.31), 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 FSTA and MNA

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