MMSC vs. FSGS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MMSC (First Trust Multi-Manager Small Cap Opportunities ETF) and FSGS (First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds from First Trust. MMSC is actively managed, while FSGS is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, MMSC returned 22.52%/yr vs 7.06%/yr for FSGS. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MMSC charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for FSGS.

Performance

MMSC vs. FSGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Multi-Manager Small Cap Opportunities ETF (MMSC) and First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MMSC achieves a 17.91% return, which is significantly higher than FSGS's 1.27% return.

MMSC

• 1D: -0.56%
• 1M: 5.15%
• YTD: 17.91%
• 6M: 17.19%
• 1Y: 42.14%
• 3Y*: 22.52%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FSGS

• 1D: -0.37%
• 1M: 0.83%
• YTD: 1.27%
• 6M: 0.20%
• 1Y: 4.81%
• 3Y*: 7.06%
• 5Y*: 2.19%
• 10Y*: —

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

MMSC vs. FSGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
MMSC First Trust Multi-Manager Small Cap Opportunities ETF	17.91%	15.45%	22.19%	18.76%	-30.98%	1.01%
FSGS First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF	1.27%	2.41%	6.38%	15.98%	-13.17%	3.42%

Correlation

The correlation between MMSC and FSGS is 0.75, 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	0.75
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 15, 2021	0.80

The correlation between MMSC and FSGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

MMSC vs. FSGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MMSC	FSGS
Industrials	27.4%	22.0%
Technology	23.4%	18.8%
Healthcare	22.2%	16.7%
Financial Services	8.1%	19.5%
Consumer Cyclical	7.2%	8.0%
Energy	6.7%	4.2%
Basic Materials	2.5%	1.7%
Consumer Defensive	1.4%	5.0%
Utilities	0.7%	-
Communication Services	0.5%	3.1%
Real Estate	0.2%	0.9%

Return for Risk

MMSC vs. FSGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

MMSC

MMSC Risk / Return Rank: 57
MMSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
MMSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
MMSC Omega Ratio Rank: 51
MMSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
MMSC Martin Ratio Rank: 64

FSGS

FSGS Risk / Return Rank: 14
FSGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
FSGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
FSGS Omega Ratio Rank: 13
FSGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
FSGS Martin Ratio Rank: 15

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.

MMSC vs. FSGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Multi-Manager Small Cap Opportunities ETF (MMSC) and First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS). 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.

	MMSC	FSGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.90	0.32	+1.58
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.56	0.57	+1.99
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.06	+0.26
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.00	0.43	+2.58
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.46	1.21	+10.25
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MMSC vs. FSGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MMSC Sharpe Ratio is 1.90, which is higher than the FSGS Sharpe Ratio of 0.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MMSC and FSGS, 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

	MMSC	FSGS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.90	0.32	+1.58
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.11	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.29	0.30	-0.01

Drawdowns

MMSC vs. FSGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MMSC drawdown since its inception was -40.82%, smaller than the maximum FSGS drawdown of -43.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MMSC and FSGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	MMSC	FSGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.82%	-43.26%	+2.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.10%	-11.31%	-2.79%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.76%	-24.08%	-5.68%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-24.08%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.70%	-4.73%	+4.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.78%	-8.03%	-10.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.69%	3.97%	-0.28%

Volatility

MMSC vs. FSGS - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Multi-Manager Small Cap Opportunities ETF (MMSC) has a higher volatility of 6.69% compared to First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS) at 3.74%. This indicates that MMSC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FSGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MMSC	FSGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.69%	3.74%	+2.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.11%	10.73%	+6.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.35%	15.24%	+7.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.46%	20.14%	+4.32%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.46%	22.81%	+1.65%

MMSC vs. FSGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

MMSC has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than FSGS's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

MMSC vs. FSGS - Dividend Comparison

Neither MMSC nor FSGS has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FSGS First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF	0.00%	0.00%	2.71%	2.29%	1.95%	1.35%	1.32%	1.77%	2.13%	1.15%
MMSC First Trust Multi-Manager Small Cap Opportunities ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.41%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MMSC and FSGS in my portfolio?

MMSC and FSGS have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MMSC or FSGS?

MMSC has higher volatility (6.69%) compared to FSGS (3.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MMSC dropped -40.82% vs FSGS's -43.26%.

Which ETF is better, MMSC or FSGS?

On 3-year performance, MMSC leads with 22.52% vs 7.06% for FSGS. On fees, FSGS is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, FSGS has been the lower-risk option at 3.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MMSC or FSGS?

Over the 3-year period, MMSC has performed better with a 22.52% return vs 7.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MMSC or FSGS?

FSGS is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for MMSC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MMSC or FSGS?

MMSC and FSGS have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between MMSC and FSGS?

Their fees differ too: 0.95% for MMSC and 0.60% for FSGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MMSC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.90 vs 0.32), 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.