LAGWX vs. FCPGX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

LAGWX (Lord Abbett Developing Growth Fund) and FCPGX (Fidelity Small Cap Growth Fund) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, LAGWX returned 14.84%/yr vs 14.76%/yr for FCPGX. Their correlation of 0.95 suggests significant overlap in exposure. LAGWX charges 0.93%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for FCPGX.

Performance

LAGWX vs. FCPGX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lord Abbett Developing Growth Fund (LAGWX) and Fidelity Small Cap Growth Fund (FCPGX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LAGWX achieves a 31.21% return, which is significantly higher than FCPGX's 17.99% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with LAGWX having a 14.84% annualized return and FCPGX not far behind at 14.76%.

LAGWX

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: 5.85%
• YTD: 31.21%
• 6M: 26.95%
• 1Y: 59.61%
• 3Y*: 21.73%
• 5Y*: 4.65%
• 10Y*: 14.84%

FCPGX

• 1D: -0.48%
• 1M: 1.35%
• YTD: 17.99%
• 6M: 14.58%
• 1Y: 37.19%
• 3Y*: 20.62%
• 5Y*: 8.07%
• 10Y*: 14.76%

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

LAGWX vs. FCPGX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
LAGWX Lord Abbett Developing Growth Fund	31.21%	14.37%	21.89%	8.50%	-36.09%	-2.77%	72.40%	31.47%	4.52%	29.92%
FCPGX Fidelity Small Cap Growth Fund	17.99%	11.20%	20.56%	19.02%	-25.34%	10.50%	36.41%	36.31%	-4.57%	28.99%

Correlation

The correlation between LAGWX and FCPGX is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.93
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 5, 2004	0.95

The correlation between LAGWX and FCPGX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

LAGWX vs. FCPGX — Risk / Return Rank

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

LAGWX

LAGWX Risk / Return Rank: 67
LAGWX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
LAGWX Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
LAGWX Omega Ratio Rank: 50
LAGWX Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
LAGWX Martin Ratio Rank: 84

FCPGX

FCPGX Risk / Return Rank: 43
FCPGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
FCPGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
FCPGX Omega Ratio Rank: 32
FCPGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
FCPGX Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

LAGWX vs. FCPGX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lord Abbett Developing Growth Fund (LAGWX) and Fidelity Small Cap Growth Fund (FCPGX). 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.

	LAGWX	FCPGX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.32	1.77	+0.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.95	2.44	+0.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.30	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.18	2.86	+1.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.56	11.49	+4.07
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LAGWX vs. FCPGX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LAGWX Sharpe Ratio is 2.32, which is higher than the FCPGX Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LAGWX and FCPGX, 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

	LAGWX	FCPGX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.32	1.77	+0.55
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.17	0.35	-0.18
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.55	0.65	-0.10
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.50	0.53	-0.03

Drawdowns

LAGWX vs. FCPGX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LAGWX drawdown since its inception was -60.31%, roughly equal to the maximum FCPGX drawdown of -59.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LAGWX and FCPGX.

Drawdown Indicators

	LAGWX	FCPGX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.31%	-59.11%	-1.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.72%	-13.12%	-1.60%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-32.10%	-28.69%	-3.41%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-51.25%	-39.04%	-12.21%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-54.38%	-39.04%	-15.34%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.33%	-0.87%	+0.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.07%	-10.70%	-6.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.94%	3.26%	+0.68%

Volatility

LAGWX vs. FCPGX - Volatility Comparison

Lord Abbett Developing Growth Fund (LAGWX) has a higher volatility of 9.55% compared to Fidelity Small Cap Growth Fund (FCPGX) at 6.52%. This indicates that LAGWX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FCPGX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LAGWX	FCPGX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.55%	6.52%	+3.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.44%	16.19%	+5.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.52%	21.19%	+5.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	27.66%	23.48%	+4.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	27.24%	22.84%	+4.40%

LAGWX vs. FCPGX - Expense Ratio Comparison

LAGWX has a 0.93% expense ratio, which is lower than FCPGX's 1.00% expense ratio.

Dividends

LAGWX vs. FCPGX - Dividend Comparison

LAGWX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FCPGX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.41%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FCPGX Fidelity Small Cap Growth Fund	5.41%	6.38%	1.37%	0.00%	0.00%	19.27%	8.19%	5.31%	14.35%	6.88%	1.53%	4.32%
LAGWX Lord Abbett Developing Growth Fund	0.00%	0.00%	0.03%	0.00%	0.00%	12.60%	9.67%	22.87%	33.87%	0.00%	0.00%	10.03%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LAGWX and FCPGX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, LAGWX and FCPGX move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, LAGWX or FCPGX?

LAGWX has higher volatility (9.55%) compared to FCPGX (6.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LAGWX dropped -60.31% vs FCPGX's -59.11%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LAGWX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.32 vs 1.77), 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.