LLSCX vs. FZAMX
Compare and contrast key facts about Longleaf Partners Small-Cap Fund (LLSCX) and Fidelity Advisor Mid Cap II Fund Class Z (FZAMX).
LLSCX is managed by Longleaf Partners. It was launched on Feb 21, 1989. FZAMX is managed by Fidelity. It was launched on Aug 13, 2013.
Performance
LLSCX vs. FZAMX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
LLSCX vs. FZAMX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LLSCX Longleaf Partners Small-Cap Fund | -3.68% | 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 | 1.33% | 12.00% | 17.39% | 15.15% | -14.70% | 25.40% | 18.84% | 23.85% | -14.85% | 20.78% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LLSCX achieves a -3.68% return, which is significantly lower than FZAMX's 1.33% return. Over the past 10 years, LLSCX has underperformed FZAMX with an annualized return of 6.69%, while FZAMX has yielded a comparatively higher 10.76% annualized return.
LLSCX
- 1D
- 0.61%
- 1M
- -3.81%
- YTD
- -3.68%
- 6M
- -2.59%
- 1Y
- 2.07%
- 3Y*
- 9.42%
- 5Y*
- 1.87%
- 10Y*
- 6.69%
FZAMX
- 1D
- -1.43%
- 1M
- -8.81%
- YTD
- 1.33%
- 6M
- 5.63%
- 1Y
- 21.86%
- 3Y*
- 14.09%
- 5Y*
- 8.15%
- 10Y*
- 10.76%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
LLSCX vs. FZAMX - Expense Ratio Comparison
LLSCX has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than FZAMX's 0.61% expense ratio.
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.
| LLSCX | FZAMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.15 | 1.00 | -0.85 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.32 | 1.47 | -1.15 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.04 | 1.21 | -0.17 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.10 | 1.32 | -1.22 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.30 | 5.87 | -5.57 |
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
| LLSCX | FZAMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.15 | 1.00 | -0.85 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.11 | 0.41 | -0.30 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.27 | 0.52 | -0.24 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.51 | 0.50 | +0.01 |
Correlation
The correlation between LLSCX and FZAMX is 0.80, 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
LLSCX vs. FZAMX - Dividend Comparison
LLSCX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.22%, less than FZAMX's 6.96% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LLSCX Longleaf Partners Small-Cap Fund | 1.22% | 1.17% | 0.11% | 0.94% | 1.20% | 0.82% | 5.85% | 14.89% | 18.13% | 8.43% | 18.01% | 5.91% |
FZAMX Fidelity Advisor Mid Cap II Fund Class Z | 6.96% | 10.09% | 6.93% | 2.83% | 5.86% | 18.58% | 1.41% | 3.50% | 10.72% | 7.81% | 5.00% | 4.90% |
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 graphics...
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 | -10.47% | -14.82% | +4.35% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.37% | -25.24% | -3.13% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.23% | -42.32% | +0.09% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.92% | -9.77% | +1.85% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.90% | -6.14% | -2.76% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.68% | 3.34% | +0.34% |
Volatility
LLSCX vs. FZAMX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Longleaf Partners Small-Cap Fund (LLSCX) is 3.90%, while Fidelity Advisor Mid Cap II Fund Class Z (FZAMX) has a volatility of 7.69%. This indicates that LLSCX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FZAMX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| LLSCX | FZAMX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.90% | 7.69% | -3.79% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.23% | 13.44% | -4.21% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.42% | 22.07% | -6.65% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.00% | 20.12% | -3.12% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.58% | 20.85% | +3.73% |