MCSFX vs. FCGCX

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

MCSFX (MFS Commodity Strategy Fund) and FCGCX (Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C) are both Commodities funds. Over the past 5 years, MCSFX returned 9.02%/yr vs 11.20%/yr for FCGCX. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MCSFX charges 1.89%/yr vs 1.97%/yr for FCGCX.

Performance

MCSFX vs. FCGCX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MFS Commodity Strategy Fund (MCSFX) and Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C (FCGCX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with MCSFX having a 13.61% return and FCGCX slightly lower at 13.36%.

MCSFX

• 1D: -1.21%
• 1M: -8.71%
• YTD: 13.61%
• 6M: 12.05%
• 1Y: 25.24%
• 3Y*: 11.82%
• 5Y*: 9.02%
• 10Y*: —

FCGCX

• 1D: -1.78%
• 1M: -7.32%
• YTD: 13.36%
• 6M: 12.91%
• 1Y: 33.97%
• 3Y*: 15.68%
• 5Y*: 11.20%
• 10Y*: 11.28%

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

MCSFX vs. FCGCX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
MCSFX MFS Commodity Strategy Fund	13.61%	17.09%	4.32%	-7.25%	12.27%	26.40%	-1.34%	-1.69%
FCGCX Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C	13.36%	27.29%	1.90%	-6.06%	19.45%	24.85%	4.96%	4.36%

Correlation

The correlation between MCSFX and FCGCX is 0.62, 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	0.62
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.58
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 20, 2019	0.57

The correlation between MCSFX and FCGCX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MCSFX vs. FCGCX — Risk / Return Rank

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

MCSFX

MCSFX Risk / Return Rank: 33
MCSFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
MCSFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
MCSFX Omega Ratio Rank: 32
MCSFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
MCSFX Martin Ratio Rank: 41

FCGCX

FCGCX Risk / Return Rank: 62
FCGCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
FCGCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
FCGCX Omega Ratio Rank: 49
FCGCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
FCGCX Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

MCSFX vs. FCGCX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MFS Commodity Strategy Fund (MCSFX) and Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C (FCGCX). 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.

	MCSFX	FCGCX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.41	1.92	-0.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.89	2.53	-0.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.33	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.95	3.24	-1.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.94	12.97	-5.04

MCSFX vs. FCGCX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCSFX Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is comparable to the FCGCX Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCSFX and FCGCX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

MCSFX vs. FCGCX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCSFX drawdown since its inception was -37.16%, smaller than the maximum FCGCX drawdown of -59.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCSFX and FCGCX.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCSFX	FCGCX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.16%	-59.67%	+22.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.47%	-10.13%	-1.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.47%	-19.96%	+8.49%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.16%	-27.43%	-9.73%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-49.31%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.47%	-10.13%	-1.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.19%	-21.15%	+2.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.86%	2.53%	+0.33%

Volatility

MCSFX vs. FCGCX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for MFS Commodity Strategy Fund (MCSFX) is 3.43%, while Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C (FCGCX) has a volatility of 5.58%. This indicates that MCSFX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FCGCX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MCSFX	FCGCX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.43%	5.58%	-2.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.86%	14.00%	-0.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.97%	17.11%	-1.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.13%	21.40%	+12.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.47%	22.39%	+7.08%

MCSFX vs. FCGCX - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCSFX has a 1.89% expense ratio, which is lower than FCGCX's 1.97% expense ratio.

Dividends

MCSFX vs. FCGCX - Dividend Comparison

MCSFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.24%, more than FCGCX's 1.30% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FCGCX Fidelity Advisor Global Commodity Stock Fund Class C	1.30%	1.48%	1.38%	0.80%	1.09%	2.41%	0.59%	1.94%	1.11%	0.36%	0.71%	1.49%
MCSFX MFS Commodity Strategy Fund	13.24%	15.05%	2.25%	1.04%	26.24%	54.80%	0.15%	0.86%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MCSFX and FCGCX in my portfolio?

MCSFX and FCGCX have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MCSFX or FCGCX?

FCGCX has higher volatility (5.58%) compared to MCSFX (3.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCSFX dropped -37.16% vs FCGCX's -59.67%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FCGCX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.92 vs 1.41), 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.