LGLAX vs. FCGSX

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

LGLAX (Lord Abbett Growth Leaders Fund Class A) and FCGSX (Fidelity Series Growth Company Fund) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, LGLAX returned 17.76%/yr vs 24.56%/yr for FCGSX. With a 0.95 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. LGLAX charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.00%/yr for FCGSX.

Performance

LGLAX vs. FCGSX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lord Abbett Growth Leaders Fund Class A (LGLAX) and Fidelity Series Growth Company Fund (FCGSX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LGLAX achieves a 9.34% return, which is significantly lower than FCGSX's 23.81% return. Over the past 10 years, LGLAX has underperformed FCGSX with an annualized return of 17.76%, while FCGSX has yielded a comparatively higher 24.56% annualized return.

LGLAX

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: 2.69%
• YTD: 9.34%
• 6M: 7.24%
• 1Y: 23.93%
• 3Y*: 27.85%
• 5Y*: 10.76%
• 10Y*: 17.76%

FCGSX

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: 5.27%
• YTD: 23.81%
• 6M: 24.50%
• 1Y: 56.65%
• 3Y*: 34.72%
• 5Y*: 19.49%
• 10Y*: 24.56%

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

LGLAX vs. FCGSX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
LGLAX Lord Abbett Growth Leaders Fund Class A	9.34%	16.20%	44.60%	32.97%	-38.87%	8.32%	77.11%	34.68%	-1.32%	31.29%
FCGSX Fidelity Series Growth Company Fund	23.81%	25.52%	38.00%	45.97%	-32.15%	25.13%	70.01%	39.75%	-4.03%	37.69%

Correlation

The correlation between LGLAX and FCGSX 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	0.94
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.95
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 2013	0.95

The correlation between LGLAX and FCGSX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

LGLAX vs. FCGSX — Risk / Return Rank

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

LGLAX

LGLAX Risk / Return Rank: 15
LGLAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
LGLAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
LGLAX Omega Ratio Rank: 17
LGLAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
LGLAX Martin Ratio Rank: 12

FCGSX

FCGSX Risk / Return Rank: 90
FCGSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
FCGSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
FCGSX Omega Ratio Rank: 80
FCGSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
FCGSX Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

LGLAX vs. FCGSX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lord Abbett Growth Leaders Fund Class A (LGLAX) and Fidelity Series Growth Company Fund (FCGSX). 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.

	LGLAX	FCGSX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.13	3.18	-2.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.57	3.96	-2.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.52	-0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.12	5.38	-4.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.24	24.53	-21.29
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LGLAX vs. FCGSX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LGLAX Sharpe Ratio is 1.13, which is lower than the FCGSX Sharpe Ratio of 3.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LGLAX and FCGSX, 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

	LGLAX	FCGSX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.13	3.18	-2.05
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.42	0.83	-0.41
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.72	1.06	-0.34
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.69	0.98	-0.29

Drawdowns

LGLAX vs. FCGSX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LGLAX drawdown since its inception was -46.11%, which is greater than FCGSX's maximum drawdown of -38.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LGLAX and FCGSX.

Drawdown Indicators

	LGLAX	FCGSX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.11%	-38.77%	-7.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.10%	-10.42%	-10.68%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.29%	-26.07%	-3.22%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-46.11%	-38.77%	-7.34%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-46.11%	-38.77%	-7.34%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.91%	-0.09%	-0.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.44%	-6.96%	-2.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.31%	2.28%	+5.03%

Volatility

LGLAX vs. FCGSX - Volatility Comparison

Lord Abbett Growth Leaders Fund Class A (LGLAX) has a higher volatility of 5.39% compared to Fidelity Series Growth Company Fund (FCGSX) at 4.38%. This indicates that LGLAX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FCGSX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LGLAX	FCGSX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.39%	4.38%	+1.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.77%	13.34%	+2.43%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.08%	17.63%	+3.45%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.84%	23.64%	+2.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.79%	23.24%	+1.55%

LGLAX vs. FCGSX - Expense Ratio Comparison

LGLAX has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than FCGSX's 0.00% expense ratio.

Dividends

LGLAX vs. FCGSX - Dividend Comparison

LGLAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.92%, less than FCGSX's 8.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FCGSX Fidelity Series Growth Company Fund	8.46%	10.48%	12.49%	3.13%	0.61%	38.65%	31.99%	11.06%	13.21%	10.51%	2.44%	0.25%
LGLAX Lord Abbett Growth Leaders Fund Class A	1.92%	2.10%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	24.88%	9.57%	8.23%	20.27%	6.56%	0.00%	4.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LGLAX and FCGSX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, LGLAX and FCGSX 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, LGLAX or FCGSX?

LGLAX has higher volatility (5.39%) compared to FCGSX (4.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LGLAX dropped -46.11% vs FCGSX's -38.77%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FCGSX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.18 vs 1.13), 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.