LOGO vs. FFSM
LOGO (Alpha Brands Consumption Leaders ETF) and FFSM (Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LOGO returned -1.07% vs 39.96% for FFSM. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LOGO charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.43%/yr for FFSM.
Performance
LOGO vs. FFSM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LOGO achieves a -4.41% return, which is significantly lower than FFSM's 22.47% return.
LOGO
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -3.87%
- YTD
- -4.41%
- 6M
- -5.79%
- 1Y
- -1.07%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FFSM
- 1D
- 0.64%
- 1M
- 5.51%
- YTD
- 22.47%
- 6M
- 19.44%
- 1Y
- 39.96%
- 3Y*
- 22.39%
- 5Y*
- 10.98%
- 10Y*
- —
LOGO vs. FFSM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LOGO Alpha Brands Consumption Leaders ETF | -4.41% | 4.84% |
FFSM Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF | 22.47% | 16.59% |
Correlation
The correlation between LOGO and FFSM is 0.60, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2025 | 0.60 |
The correlation between LOGO and FFSM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
LOGO vs. FFSM — Risk / Return Rank
LOGO
FFSM
LOGO vs. FFSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alpha Brands Consumption Leaders ETF (LOGO) and Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF (FFSM). 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.
| LOGO | FFSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.99 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.37 | -0.37 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.06 | 3.87 | -3.93 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.14 | 15.58 | -15.72 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LOGO vs. FFSM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LOGO drawdown since its inception was -18.34%, smaller than the maximum FFSM drawdown of -26.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LOGO and FFSM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LOGO | FFSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.34% | -26.65% | +8.31% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -18.34% | -10.37% | -7.97% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -24.78% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -26.65% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -10.90% | -0.87% | -10.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.89% | -7.78% | +1.89% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.64% | 2.57% | +5.07% |
Volatility
LOGO vs. FFSM - Volatility Comparison
Alpha Brands Consumption Leaders ETF (LOGO) has a higher volatility of 8.75% compared to Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF (FFSM) at 6.37%. This indicates that LOGO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FFSM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LOGO | FFSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.75% | 6.37% | +2.38% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.28% | 14.65% | -1.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.04% | 18.63% | -2.59% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.75% | 20.76% | -5.01% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.75% | 20.61% | -4.86% |
LOGO vs. FFSM - Expense Ratio Comparison
LOGO has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than FFSM's 0.43% expense ratio.
Dividends
LOGO vs. FFSM - Dividend Comparison
LOGO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FFSM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.43%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FFSM Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF | 0.43% | 0.56% | 0.62% | 0.56% | 0.58% | 0.37% |
LOGO Alpha Brands Consumption Leaders ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LOGO and FFSM have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LOGO has higher volatility (8.75%) compared to FFSM (6.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LOGO dropped -18.34% vs FFSM's -26.65%.
On 1-year performance, FFSM leads with 39.96% vs -1.07% for LOGO. On fees, FFSM is cheaper at 0.43% per year. On volatility, FFSM has been the lower-risk option at 6.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, FFSM has performed better with a 39.96% return vs -1.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FFSM is cheaper with a 0.43% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for LOGO.
FFSM has the higher dividend yield at 0.43%, compared with 0.00% for LOGO.
They also come from different issuers: Alpha Brands and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for LOGO and 0.43% for FFSM.
FFSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs -0.07), 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 LOGO and FFSM
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