MSEGX vs. FCGSX
Compare and contrast key facts about Morgan Stanley Institutional Growth Portfolio (MSEGX) and Fidelity Series Growth Company Fund (FCGSX).
MSEGX is an actively managed fund by Morgan Stanley. It was launched on Apr 2, 1991. FCGSX is managed by Fidelity. It was launched on Nov 7, 2013.
Performance
MSEGX vs. FCGSX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
MSEGX vs. FCGSX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MSEGX Morgan Stanley Institutional Growth Portfolio | -15.42% | 24.43% | 46.29% | 49.87% | -60.27% | -0.31% | 115.11% | 38.93% | 5.01% | 43.53% |
FCGSX Fidelity Series Growth Company Fund | -2.49% | 25.52% | 38.00% | 45.97% | -32.15% | 25.13% | 70.01% | 39.75% | -4.03% | 37.69% |
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MSEGX achieves a -15.42% return, which is significantly lower than FCGSX's -2.49% return. Over the past 10 years, MSEGX has underperformed FCGSX with an annualized return of 15.47%, while FCGSX has yielded a comparatively higher 21.96% annualized return.
MSEGX
- 1D
- 4.54%
- 1M
- -4.32%
- YTD
- -15.42%
- 6M
- -22.09%
- 1Y
- 15.60%
- 3Y*
- 25.22%
- 5Y*
- -1.90%
- 10Y*
- 15.47%
FCGSX
- 1D
- 4.44%
- 1M
- -4.59%
- YTD
- -2.49%
- 6M
- 1.86%
- 1Y
- 38.78%
- 3Y*
- 28.90%
- 5Y*
- 14.89%
- 10Y*
- 21.96%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
MSEGX vs. FCGSX - Expense Ratio Comparison
MSEGX has a 0.87% expense ratio, which is higher than FCGSX's 0.00% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
MSEGX vs. FCGSX — Risk / Return Rank
MSEGX
FCGSX
MSEGX vs. FCGSX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Morgan Stanley Institutional Growth Portfolio (MSEGX) and Fidelity Series Growth Company Fund (FCGSX). 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.
| MSEGX | FCGSX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.54 | 1.66 | -1.12 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.00 | 2.34 | -1.34 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.12 | 1.33 | -0.21 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.57 | 2.98 | -2.41 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.50 | 13.43 | -11.93 |
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
| MSEGX | FCGSX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.54 | 1.66 | -1.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.05 | 0.63 | -0.68 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.46 | 0.95 | -0.49 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.40 | 0.88 | -0.48 |
Correlation
The correlation between MSEGX and FCGSX is 0.84, 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
MSEGX vs. FCGSX - Dividend Comparison
MSEGX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FCGSX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.74%.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MSEGX Morgan Stanley Institutional Growth Portfolio | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.42% | 0.00% | 18.70% | 26.52% | 10.03% | 22.75% | 5.67% | 22.18% | 13.17% | 7.76% |
FCGSX Fidelity Series Growth Company Fund | 10.74% | 10.48% | 12.49% | 3.13% | 0.61% | 38.65% | 31.99% | 11.06% | 13.21% | 10.51% | 2.44% | 0.25% |
Drawdowns
MSEGX vs. FCGSX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MSEGX drawdown since its inception was -69.57%, which is greater than FCGSX's maximum drawdown of -38.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSEGX and FCGSX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| MSEGX | FCGSX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -69.57% | -38.77% | -30.80% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -27.83% | -13.10% | -14.73% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -69.57% | -38.77% | -30.80% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -69.57% | -38.77% | -30.80% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -26.90% | -6.44% | -20.46% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -19.49% | -7.05% | -12.44% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.60% | 2.91% | +7.69% |
Volatility
MSEGX vs. FCGSX - Volatility Comparison
Morgan Stanley Institutional Growth Portfolio (MSEGX) has a higher volatility of 9.47% compared to Fidelity Series Growth Company Fund (FCGSX) at 8.15%. This indicates that MSEGX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FCGSX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| MSEGX | FCGSX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.47% | 8.15% | +1.32% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.11% | 14.39% | +7.72% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 33.40% | 24.14% | +9.26% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 39.79% | 23.69% | +16.10% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 33.63% | 23.19% | +10.44% |