FSTA vs. XLF

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FSTA (Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF) and XLF (State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FSTA is a Consumer Staples Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Consumer Staples Index, while XLF is a Financials Equities fund tracking the Financial Select Sector Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FSTA returned 7.91%/yr vs 13.72%/yr for XLF. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.08% expense ratio.

Performance

FSTA vs. XLF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF (FSTA) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FSTA achieves a 8.86% return, which is significantly higher than XLF's -0.77% return. Over the past 10 years, FSTA has underperformed XLF with an annualized return of 7.91%, while XLF has yielded a comparatively higher 13.72% annualized return.

FSTA

• 1D: 1.73%
• 1M: -0.47%
• YTD: 8.86%
• 6M: 8.88%
• 1Y: 5.28%
• 3Y*: 8.04%
• 5Y*: 7.17%
• 10Y*: 7.91%

XLF

• 1D: 0.34%
• 1M: 4.10%
• YTD: -0.77%
• 6M: -1.95%
• 1Y: 7.67%
• 3Y*: 19.94%
• 5Y*: 10.00%
• 10Y*: 13.72%

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

FSTA vs. XLF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FSTA Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF	8.86%	1.82%	13.31%	2.29%	-1.72%	17.44%	10.96%	26.84%	-8.49%	12.71%
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF	-0.77%	14.90%	30.56%	12.03%	-10.59%	34.80%	-1.74%	31.88%	-13.06%	22.00%

Correlation

The correlation between FSTA and XLF is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.19
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.41
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.50
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2013	0.50

Over the past year, the correlation between FSTA and XLF has dropped to 0.19 - well below their long-term average of 0.49, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

FSTA vs. XLF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FSTA	XLF
Consumer Defensive	97.6%	-
Consumer Cyclical	1.7%	-
Industrials	0.3%	0.2%
Basic Materials	0.3%	-
Healthcare	0.0%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	98.0%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	1.8%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FSTA vs. XLF — Risk / Return Rank

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

FSTA

FSTA Risk / Return Rank: 14
FSTA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
FSTA Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
FSTA Omega Ratio Rank: 13
FSTA Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
FSTA Martin Ratio Rank: 14

XLF

XLF Risk / Return Rank: 15
XLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
XLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
XLF Omega Ratio Rank: 16
XLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
XLF Martin Ratio Rank: 15

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. XLF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF (FSTA) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF). 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.

	FSTA	XLF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.42	0.53	-0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.69	0.81	-0.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.08	1.10	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.57	0.52	+0.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.12	1.33	-0.20

FSTA vs. XLF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FSTA Sharpe Ratio is 0.42, which is comparable to the XLF Sharpe Ratio of 0.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FSTA and XLF, 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

FSTA vs. XLF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FSTA drawdown since its inception was -25.13%, smaller than the maximum XLF drawdown of -82.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSTA and XLF.

Drawdown Indicators

	FSTA	XLF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.13%	-82.69%	+57.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.29%	-14.79%	+5.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.76%	-15.54%	+3.78%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.58%	-25.81%	+9.23%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-25.13%	-42.86%	+17.73%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.90%	-3.64%	-2.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.56%	-19.99%	+16.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.71%	5.79%	-1.08%

Volatility

FSTA vs. XLF - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF (FSTA) has a higher volatility of 4.99% compared to State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) at 4.12%. This indicates that FSTA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FSTA	XLF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.99%	4.12%	+0.87%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.34%	11.27%	-0.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.79%	14.62%	-1.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.17%	18.58%	-5.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.59%	22.11%	-7.52%

FSTA vs. XLF - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FSTA and XLF have an expense ratio of 0.08%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FSTA vs. XLF - Dividend Comparison

FSTA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.20%, more than XLF's 1.50% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FSTA Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples Index ETF	2.20%	2.34%	2.25%	2.66%	2.26%	2.15%	2.47%	2.46%	3.01%	2.42%	2.53%	2.86%
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF	1.50%	1.31%	1.42%	1.71%	2.04%	1.63%	2.03%	1.87%	2.08%	1.48%	21.10%	1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FSTA and XLF in my portfolio?

FSTA and XLF have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FSTA or XLF?

FSTA has higher volatility (4.99%) compared to XLF (4.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FSTA dropped -25.13% vs XLF's -82.69%.

Which ETF is better, FSTA or XLF?

On 10-year performance, XLF leads with 13.72% vs 7.91% for FSTA. Both ETFs have the same 0.08% expense ratio. On volatility, XLF has been the lower-risk option at 4.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FSTA or XLF?

Over the 10-year period, XLF has performed better with a 13.72% return vs 7.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FSTA or XLF?

FSTA and XLF have the same expense ratio: 0.08% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FSTA or XLF?

FSTA has the higher dividend yield at 2.20%, compared with 1.50% for XLF.

What is the main difference between FSTA and XLF?

FSTA is categorized as Consumer Staples Equities, while XLF is Financials Equities. FSTA tracks MSCI USA IMI Consumer Staples Index, while XLF tracks Financial Select Sector Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and State Street.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XLF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.53 vs 0.42), 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.