FZAMX vs. LLSCX
FZAMX (Fidelity Advisor Mid Cap II Fund Class Z) and LLSCX (Longleaf Partners Small-Cap Fund) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, FZAMX returned 12.19%/yr vs 5.81%/yr for LLSCX. Their 0.78 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. FZAMX charges 0.61%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for LLSCX.
Performance
FZAMX vs. LLSCX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FZAMX achieves a 21.69% return, which is significantly higher than LLSCX's -3.30% return. Over the past 10 years, FZAMX has outperformed LLSCX with an annualized return of 12.19%, while LLSCX has yielded a comparatively lower 5.81% annualized return.
FZAMX
- 1D
- 1.77%
- 1M
- -2.80%
- 6M
- 15.92%
- YTD
- 21.69%
- 1Y
- 34.39%
- 3Y*
- 17.98%
- 5Y*
- 11.32%
- 10Y*
- 12.19%
- ALL TIME*
- 11.23%
LLSCX
- 1D
- -2.33%
- 1M
- 1.15%
- 6M
- -4.81%
- YTD
- -3.30%
- 1Y
- 1.06%
- 3Y*
- 5.40%
- 5Y*
- 2.00%
- 10Y*
- 5.81%
- ALL TIME*
- 9.87%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | |
| $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
FZAMX vs. LLSCX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FZAMX Fidelity Advisor Mid Cap II Fund Class Z | 21.69% | 12.00% | 17.39% | 15.15% | -14.70% | 25.40% | 18.84% | 23.85% | -14.85% | 20.78% |
LLSCX Longleaf Partners Small-Cap Fund | -3.30% | 7.56% | 9.69% | 20.17% | -19.25% | 11.18% | 4.17% | 27.74% | -6.52% | 9.07% |
Correlation
The correlation between FZAMX and LLSCX is 0.42, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.42 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.67 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.78 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.78 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 20, 2013 | 0.78 |
Over the past year, the correlation between FZAMX and LLSCX has dropped to 0.42 - well below their long-term average of 0.78, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
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
FZAMX vs. LLSCX — Risk / Return Rank
FZAMX
LLSCX
FZAMX vs. LLSCX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Advisor Mid Cap II Fund Class Z (FZAMX) and Longleaf Partners Small-Cap Fund (LLSCX). 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.
| FZAMX | LLSCX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.88 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.56 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 0.99 | +0.31 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.24 | -0.15 | +3.39 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.76 | -0.31 | +12.07 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FZAMX vs. LLSCX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FZAMX drawdown since its inception was -42.32%, smaller than the maximum LLSCX drawdown of -63.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FZAMX and LLSCX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FZAMX | LLSCX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -42.32% | -63.97% | +21.65% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.77% | -11.44% | +1.67% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.24% | -15.40% | -9.84% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.24% | -26.67% | +1.43% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.32% | -42.23% | -0.09% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.39% | -7.56% | +2.17% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.03% | -8.90% | +2.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.69% | 5.62% | -2.93% |
Volatility
FZAMX vs. LLSCX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Fidelity Advisor Mid Cap II Fund Class Z (FZAMX) is 4.56%, while Longleaf Partners Small-Cap Fund (LLSCX) has a volatility of 5.13%. This indicates that FZAMX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LLSCX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FZAMX | LLSCX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.56% | 5.13% | -0.57% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.46% | 10.29% | +4.17% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.14% | 13.38% | +4.76% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.27% | 17.03% | +3.24% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.91% | 24.58% | -3.67% |
FZAMX vs. LLSCX - Expense Ratio Comparison
FZAMX has a 0.61% expense ratio, which is lower than LLSCX's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
FZAMX vs. LLSCX - Dividend Comparison
FZAMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.79%, more than LLSCX's 1.21% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FZAMX Fidelity Advisor Mid Cap II Fund Class Z | 5.79% | 10.09% | 6.93% | 2.83% | 5.86% | 18.58% | 1.41% | 3.50% | 10.72% | 7.81% | 5.00% | 4.90% |
LLSCX Longleaf Partners Small-Cap Fund | 1.21% | 1.17% | 0.11% | 0.94% | 1.20% | 0.82% | 5.85% | 14.89% | 18.13% | 8.43% | 18.01% | 5.91% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FZAMX and LLSCX have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LLSCX has higher volatility (5.13%) compared to FZAMX (4.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FZAMX dropped -42.32% vs LLSCX's -63.97%.
FZAMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 vs -0.13), 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 FZAMX and LLSCX
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