LLSCX vs. FZAMX
LLSCX (Longleaf Partners Small-Cap Fund) and FZAMX (Fidelity Advisor Mid Cap II Fund Class Z) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. Over the past 10 years, LLSCX returned 5.89%/yr vs 12.33%/yr for FZAMX. Their 0.78 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. LLSCX charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.61%/yr for FZAMX.
Performance
LLSCX vs. FZAMX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LLSCX achieves a -3.33% return, which is significantly lower than FZAMX's 21.73% return. Over the past 10 years, LLSCX has underperformed FZAMX with an annualized return of 5.89%, while FZAMX has yielded a comparatively higher 12.33% annualized return.
LLSCX
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 1.11%
- 6M
- -5.03%
- YTD
- -3.33%
- 1Y
- 1.02%
- 3Y*
- 5.53%
- 5Y*
- 1.99%
- 10Y*
- 5.89%
- ALL TIME*
- 9.87%
FZAMX
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- -2.77%
- 6M
- 14.32%
- YTD
- 21.73%
- 1Y
- 34.44%
- 3Y*
- 18.07%
- 5Y*
- 11.32%
- 10Y*
- 12.33%
- ALL TIME*
- 11.23%
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 |
LLSCX vs. FZAMX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LLSCX Longleaf Partners Small-Cap Fund | -3.33% | 7.56% | 9.69% | 20.17% | -19.25% | 11.18% | 4.17% | 27.74% | -6.52% | 9.07% |
FZAMX Fidelity Advisor Mid Cap II Fund Class Z | 21.73% | 12.00% | 17.39% | 15.15% | -14.70% | 25.40% | 18.84% | 23.85% | -14.85% | 20.78% |
Correlation
The correlation between LLSCX and FZAMX 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 LLSCX and FZAMX 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
LLSCX vs. FZAMX — Risk / Return Rank
LLSCX
FZAMX
LLSCX vs. FZAMX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Longleaf Partners Small-Cap Fund (LLSCX) and Fidelity Advisor Mid Cap II Fund Class Z (FZAMX). 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.
| LLSCX | FZAMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.86 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.53 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.31 | -0.31 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.07 | 3.34 | -3.41 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.15 | 12.05 | -12.20 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LLSCX vs. FZAMX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LLSCX drawdown since its inception was -63.97%, which is greater than FZAMX's maximum drawdown of -42.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LLSCX and FZAMX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LLSCX | FZAMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -63.97% | -42.32% | -21.65% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.44% | -9.77% | -1.67% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.40% | -25.24% | +9.84% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.67% | -25.24% | -1.43% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.23% | -42.32% | +0.09% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.59% | -5.36% | -2.23% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.90% | -6.03% | -2.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.63% | 2.71% | +2.92% |
Volatility
LLSCX vs. FZAMX - Volatility Comparison
Longleaf Partners Small-Cap Fund (LLSCX) has a higher volatility of 5.13% compared to Fidelity Advisor Mid Cap II Fund Class Z (FZAMX) at 4.43%. This indicates that LLSCX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FZAMX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LLSCX | FZAMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.13% | 4.43% | +0.70% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.25% | 14.46% | -4.21% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.34% | 18.14% | -4.80% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.03% | 20.26% | -3.23% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.58% | 20.91% | +3.67% |
LLSCX vs. FZAMX - Expense Ratio Comparison
LLSCX has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than FZAMX's 0.61% expense ratio.
Dividends
LLSCX vs. FZAMX - Dividend Comparison
LLSCX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.21%, less than FZAMX's 5.79% 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
LLSCX and FZAMX 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 (4.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LLSCX dropped -63.97% vs FZAMX's -42.32%.
FZAMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.80 vs -0.06), 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 LLSCX and FZAMX
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