NACP vs. FITZ
NACP (Impact Shares NAACP Minority Empowerment ETF) and FITZ (Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. NACP is passively managed, while FITZ is actively managed. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NACP charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for FITZ.
Performance
NACP vs. FITZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
NACP
- 1D
- 0.14%
- 1M
- 8.57%
- YTD
- 22.35%
- 6M
- 21.44%
- 1Y
- 44.11%
- 3Y*
- 27.38%
- 5Y*
- 16.01%
- 10Y*
- —
FITZ
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NACP vs. FITZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
NACP Impact Shares NAACP Minority Empowerment ETF | 1.28% |
FITZ Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF | -1.66% |
Correlation
The correlation between NACP and FITZ is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 29, 2026 | 0.90 |
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
NACP vs. FITZ — Risk / Return Rank
NACP
FITZ
NACP vs. FITZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Impact Shares NAACP Minority Empowerment ETF (NACP) and Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF (FITZ). 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.
| NACP | FITZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.54 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.59 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 20.18 | — | — |
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 charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| NACP | FITZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.16 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.92 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.93 | -7.29 | +8.22 |
Drawdowns
NACP vs. FITZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NACP drawdown since its inception was -30.96%, which is greater than FITZ's maximum drawdown of -1.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NACP and FITZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NACP | FITZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -30.96% | -1.97% | -28.99% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.65% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.66% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -27.89% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -1.97% | +1.97% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.75% | -1.08% | -4.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.19% | — | — |
Volatility
NACP vs. FITZ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NACP | FITZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.34% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.13% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.02% | 8.74% | +5.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.47% | 8.74% | +8.73% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.69% | 8.74% | +9.95% |
NACP vs. FITZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
NACP has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than FITZ's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
NACP vs. FITZ - Dividend Comparison
NACP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.55%, while FITZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FITZ Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
NACP Impact Shares NAACP Minority Empowerment ETF | 0.55% | 0.62% | 2.96% | 1.28% | 3.48% | 3.06% | 1.48% | 1.22% | 0.71% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.90, NACP and FITZ move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
On fees, NACP is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
NACP is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for FITZ.
NACP has the higher dividend yield at 0.55%, compared with 0.00% for FITZ.
They also come from different issuers: Impact Shares and Nicholas. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for NACP and 0.75% for FITZ.
Find the right allocation for NACP and FITZ
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