GTLLX vs. FGRTX
Compare and contrast key facts about Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Portfolio (GTLLX) and Fidelity Mega Cap Stock Fund (FGRTX).
GTLLX is managed by Glenmede. It was launched on Feb 27, 2004. FGRTX is managed by Fidelity. It was launched on Dec 28, 1998.
Performance
GTLLX vs. FGRTX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
GTLLX vs. FGRTX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GTLLX Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Portfolio | -3.91% | 17.44% | 20.71% | 27.10% | -21.69% | 32.91% | 18.80% | 34.86% | -5.23% | 27.83% |
FGRTX Fidelity Mega Cap Stock Fund | -2.11% | 26.92% | 25.98% | 26.51% | -8.98% | 26.29% | 12.96% | 31.07% | -7.44% | 16.98% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GTLLX achieves a -3.91% return, which is significantly lower than FGRTX's -2.11% return. Over the past 10 years, GTLLX has underperformed FGRTX with an annualized return of 13.87%, while FGRTX has yielded a comparatively higher 15.34% annualized return.
GTLLX
- 1D
- 3.87%
- 1M
- -4.30%
- YTD
- -3.91%
- 6M
- -1.68%
- 1Y
- 20.37%
- 3Y*
- 16.61%
- 5Y*
- 10.38%
- 10Y*
- 13.87%
FGRTX
- 1D
- 3.14%
- 1M
- -4.70%
- YTD
- -2.11%
- 6M
- 2.45%
- 1Y
- 26.36%
- 3Y*
- 22.46%
- 5Y*
- 14.92%
- 10Y*
- 15.34%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
GTLLX vs. FGRTX - Expense Ratio Comparison
GTLLX has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than FGRTX's 0.61% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
GTLLX vs. FGRTX — Risk / Return Rank
GTLLX
FGRTX
GTLLX vs. FGRTX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Portfolio (GTLLX) and Fidelity Mega Cap Stock Fund (FGRTX). 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.
| GTLLX | FGRTX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.95 | 1.47 | -0.52 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.48 | 2.09 | -0.61 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.20 | 1.34 | -0.13 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.29 | 2.25 | -0.96 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.23 | 10.43 | -5.20 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GTLLX | FGRTX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.95 | 1.47 | -0.52 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.36 | 0.90 | -0.54 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.56 | 0.85 | -0.29 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.50 | 0.45 | +0.05 |
Correlation
The correlation between GTLLX and FGRTX is 0.88, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Dividends
GTLLX vs. FGRTX - Dividend Comparison
GTLLX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 15.95%, more than FGRTX's 3.97% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GTLLX Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Portfolio | 15.95% | 15.33% | 40.42% | 4.91% | 7.93% | 20.20% | 15.12% | 14.10% | 16.97% | 2.29% | 0.58% | 0.61% |
FGRTX Fidelity Mega Cap Stock Fund | 3.97% | 3.89% | 2.68% | 2.06% | 4.38% | 4.79% | 7.96% | 12.98% | 21.72% | 15.57% | 1.97% | 4.16% |
Drawdowns
GTLLX vs. FGRTX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GTLLX drawdown since its inception was -54.32%, roughly equal to the maximum FGRTX drawdown of -56.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GTLLX and FGRTX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| GTLLX | FGRTX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -54.32% | -56.17% | +1.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.16% | -12.17% | +0.01% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -41.54% | -23.35% | -18.19% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -41.54% | -35.18% | -6.36% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -20.87% | -6.14% | -14.73% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.56% | -8.77% | +0.21% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.20% | 2.62% | +0.58% |
Volatility
GTLLX vs. FGRTX - Volatility Comparison
Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity Portfolio (GTLLX) has a higher volatility of 6.78% compared to Fidelity Mega Cap Stock Fund (FGRTX) at 5.56%. This indicates that GTLLX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FGRTX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| GTLLX | FGRTX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.78% | 5.56% | +1.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.31% | 9.76% | +3.55% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.44% | 18.39% | +4.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.90% | 16.73% | +12.17% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.92% | 18.12% | +6.80% |