FTDS vs. MMID
FTDS (First Trust Dividend Strength ETF) and MMID (MFS Active Mid Cap ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. FTDS is passively managed, while MMID is actively managed. Their 0.71 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. FTDS charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for MMID.
Performance
FTDS vs. MMID - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FTDS achieves a 15.08% return, which is significantly higher than MMID's 7.65% return.
FTDS
- 1D
- 0.31%
- 1M
- 4.00%
- 6M
- 8.67%
- YTD
- 15.08%
- 1Y
- 24.87%
- 3Y*
- 15.10%
- 5Y*
- 8.13%
- 10Y*
- 11.18%
- ALL TIME*
- 6.70%
MMID
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 1.23%
- 6M
- 4.97%
- YTD
- 7.65%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $146.70K | $150.71K | $191.32K | |
| $6.57K | $9.23K | $17.42K |
FTDS vs. MMID - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FTDS First Trust Dividend Strength ETF | 15.08% | 2.88% |
MMID MFS Active Mid Cap ETF | 7.65% | 0.62% |
Correlation
The correlation between FTDS and MMID is 0.71, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2025 | 0.71 |
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
FTDS vs. MMID — Risk / Return Rank
FTDS
MMID
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
FTDS vs. MMID - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Dividend Strength ETF (FTDS) and MFS Active Mid Cap ETF (MMID). 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.
| FTDS | MMID | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.61 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.38 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FTDS vs. MMID - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FTDS drawdown since its inception was -56.53%, which is greater than MMID's maximum drawdown of -7.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTDS and MMID.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FTDS | MMID | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -56.53% | -7.93% | -48.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.57% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.04% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.35% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.47% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.74% | -0.77% | +0.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.81% | -1.89% | -7.92% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.53% | — | — |
Volatility
FTDS vs. MMID - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FTDS | MMID | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.55% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.28% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.81% | 13.16% | -0.35% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.52% | 13.16% | +4.36% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.05% | 13.16% | +6.89% |
FTDS vs. MMID - Expense Ratio Comparison
FTDS has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than MMID's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
FTDS vs. MMID - Dividend Comparison
FTDS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.53%, more than MMID's 0.69% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FTDS First Trust Dividend Strength ETF | 1.53% | 1.59% | 2.05% | 2.15% | 2.31% | 0.72% | 0.99% | 1.13% | 1.14% | 0.79% | 1.24% | 0.95% |
MMID MFS Active Mid Cap ETF | 0.69% | 0.28% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FTDS and MMID have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, MMID is cheaper at 0.59% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
MMID is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for FTDS.
FTDS has the higher dividend yield at 1.53%, compared with 0.69% for MMID.
They also come from different issuers: First Trust and MFS. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for FTDS and 0.59% for MMID.
Find the right allocation for FTDS and MMID
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