GRPM vs. FFLC

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

GRPM (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF) and FFLC (Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GRPM is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400® GARP Index, while FFLC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. GRPM is passively managed, while FFLC is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, GRPM returned 7.56%/yr vs 15.52%/yr for FFLC. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GRPM charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for FFLC.

Performance

GRPM vs. FFLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF (GRPM) and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GRPM achieves a 7.01% return, which is significantly lower than FFLC's 8.51% return.

GRPM

• 1D: 0.52%
• 1M: 1.82%
• YTD: 7.01%
• 6M: 6.96%
• 1Y: 21.75%
• 3Y*: 14.21%
• 5Y*: 7.56%
• 10Y*: 10.98%

FFLC

• 1D: 0.33%
• 1M: -0.24%
• YTD: 8.51%
• 6M: 9.11%
• 1Y: 23.62%
• 3Y*: 22.38%
• 5Y*: 15.52%
• 10Y*: —

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

GRPM vs. FFLC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
GRPM Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF	7.01%	7.81%	15.67%	18.79%	-11.63%	26.35%	27.00%
FFLC Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF	8.51%	17.67%	27.89%	25.07%	-0.04%	24.53%	18.76%

Correlation

The correlation between GRPM and FFLC is 0.66, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.66
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.73
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2020	0.83

The correlation between GRPM and FFLC shifts across timeframes, from 0.66 (1 year) to 0.83 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

GRPM vs. FFLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GRPM	FFLC
Financial Services	30.6%	11.1%
Technology	15.8%	32.4%
Energy	15.0%	4.6%
Consumer Cyclical	11.4%	10.4%
Healthcare	11.4%	8.2%
Industrials	9.4%	10.8%
Consumer Defensive	6.5%	4.7%
Basic Materials	-	1.8%
Communication Services	-	11.9%
Real Estate	-	1.1%
Utilities	-	2.5%

Return for Risk

GRPM vs. FFLC — Risk / Return Rank

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

GRPM

GRPM Risk / Return Rank: 49
GRPM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
GRPM Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
GRPM Omega Ratio Rank: 40
GRPM Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
GRPM Martin Ratio Rank: 53

FFLC

FFLC Risk / Return Rank: 59
FFLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
FFLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
FFLC Omega Ratio Rank: 59
FFLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
FFLC Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

GRPM vs. FFLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF (GRPM) and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC). 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.

	GRPM	FFLC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.36	1.81	-0.45
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.01	2.47	-0.47
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.33	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.87	2.38	+0.49
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.47	10.72	-2.25
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GRPM vs. FFLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GRPM Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is comparable to the FFLC Sharpe Ratio of 1.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GRPM and FFLC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GRPM	FFLC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.36	1.81	-0.45
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.36	0.92	-0.56
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.50	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.54	1.15	-0.60

Drawdowns

GRPM vs. FFLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GRPM drawdown since its inception was -43.12%, which is greater than FFLC's maximum drawdown of -19.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GRPM and FFLC.

Drawdown Indicators

	GRPM	FFLC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-43.12%	-19.72%	-23.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.62%	-9.98%	+2.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.09%	-19.72%	-8.37%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.09%	-19.72%	-8.37%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-43.12%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.17%	-2.38%	+1.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.71%	-2.99%	-2.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.57%	2.21%	+0.36%

Volatility

GRPM vs. FFLC - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF (GRPM) and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) have volatilities of 3.79% and 3.95%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GRPM	FFLC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.79%	3.95%	-0.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.52%	10.15%	+0.37%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.10%	13.11%	+2.99%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.91%	16.97%	+3.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.26%	17.67%	+4.59%

GRPM vs. FFLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

GRPM has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than FFLC's 0.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

GRPM vs. FFLC - Dividend Comparison

GRPM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.96%, less than FFLC's 1.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FFLC Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF	1.01%	1.10%	0.82%	0.57%	1.67%	1.68%	0.89%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GRPM Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF	0.96%	1.19%	0.95%	0.96%	1.28%	0.92%	1.16%	1.25%	1.50%	1.14%	1.00%	1.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GRPM and FFLC in my portfolio?

GRPM and FFLC have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GRPM or FFLC?

FFLC has higher volatility (3.95%) compared to GRPM (3.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GRPM dropped -43.12% vs FFLC's -19.72%.

Which ETF is better, GRPM or FFLC?

On 5-year performance, FFLC leads with 15.52% vs 7.56% for GRPM. On fees, GRPM is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, GRPM has been the lower-risk option at 3.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GRPM or FFLC?

Over the 5-year period, FFLC has performed better with a 15.52% return vs 7.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GRPM or FFLC?

GRPM is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for FFLC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GRPM or FFLC?

FFLC has the higher dividend yield at 1.01%, compared with 0.96% for GRPM.

What is the main difference between GRPM and FFLC?

GRPM is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while FFLC is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for GRPM and 0.38% for FFLC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FFLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.81 vs 1.36), 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.