NNRG.NEO vs. FCCM.NEO

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

NNRG.NEO (Ninepoint Energy ETF) and FCCM.NEO (Fidelity Canadian Momentum Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NNRG.NEO is a Energy Equities fund tracking the S&P/TSX Capped Energy Total Return Index, while FCCM.NEO is a Momentum fund tracking the Fidelity Canada Canadian Momentum Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, NNRG.NEO returned 34.11%/yr vs 19.08%/yr for FCCM.NEO. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. NNRG.NEO charges 1.79%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for FCCM.NEO.

Performance

NNRG.NEO vs. FCCM.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO) and Fidelity Canadian Momentum Index ETF (FCCM.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NNRG.NEO achieves a 47.23% return, which is significantly higher than FCCM.NEO's 11.11% return.

NNRG.NEO

• 1D: 1.12%
• 1M: -0.66%
• YTD: 47.23%
• 6M: 39.75%
• 1Y: 71.20%
• 3Y*: 26.98%
• 5Y*: 34.11%
• 10Y*: —

FCCM.NEO

• 1D: 1.32%
• 1M: 3.24%
• YTD: 11.11%
• 6M: 12.84%
• 1Y: 44.14%
• 3Y*: 29.52%
• 5Y*: 19.08%
• 10Y*: —

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

NNRG.NEO vs. FCCM.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
NNRG.NEO Ninepoint Energy ETF	47.23%	19.14%	13.26%	-4.21%	66.18%	55.91%
FCCM.NEO Fidelity Canadian Momentum Index ETF	11.11%	43.17%	27.03%	10.10%	-3.42%	13.26%

Correlation

The correlation between NNRG.NEO and FCCM.NEO is -0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.09
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.16
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.23
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2021	0.23

The correlation between NNRG.NEO and FCCM.NEO shifts across timeframes, from -0.09 (1 year) to 0.23 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

NNRG.NEO vs. FCCM.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

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

NNRG.NEO

NNRG.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 83
NNRG.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
NNRG.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
NNRG.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 81
NNRG.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
NNRG.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 74

FCCM.NEO

FCCM.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 82
FCCM.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
FCCM.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
FCCM.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 86
FCCM.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
FCCM.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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.

NNRG.NEO vs. FCCM.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO) and Fidelity Canadian Momentum Index ETF (FCCM.NEO). 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.

	NNRG.NEO	FCCM.NEO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.92	2.85	+0.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.45	3.66	-0.20
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.52	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.60	3.59	+3.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.91	15.61	-1.71
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NNRG.NEO vs. FCCM.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NNRG.NEO Sharpe Ratio is 2.92, which is comparable to the FCCM.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 2.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NNRG.NEO and FCCM.NEO, 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

	NNRG.NEO	FCCM.NEO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.92	2.85	+0.08
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.99	1.42	-0.43
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.08	1.34	-0.26

Drawdowns

NNRG.NEO vs. FCCM.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NNRG.NEO drawdown since its inception was -35.78%, which is greater than FCCM.NEO's maximum drawdown of -16.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NNRG.NEO and FCCM.NEO.

Drawdown Indicators

	NNRG.NEO	FCCM.NEO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.78%	-16.59%	-19.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.84%	-12.36%	+1.52%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.52%	-12.36%	-11.16%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.78%	-16.59%	-19.19%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.63%	-1.19%	-2.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.58%	-2.60%	-6.98%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.14%	2.83%	+2.31%

Volatility

NNRG.NEO vs. FCCM.NEO - Volatility Comparison

Ninepoint Energy ETF (NNRG.NEO) has a higher volatility of 10.30% compared to Fidelity Canadian Momentum Index ETF (FCCM.NEO) at 5.20%. This indicates that NNRG.NEO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FCCM.NEO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NNRG.NEO	FCCM.NEO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.30%	5.20%	+5.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.65%	12.63%	+8.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.55%	15.60%	+8.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.60%	13.47%	+21.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.55%	13.41%	+21.14%

NNRG.NEO vs. FCCM.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

NNRG.NEO has a 1.79% expense ratio, which is higher than FCCM.NEO's 0.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

NNRG.NEO vs. FCCM.NEO - Dividend Comparison

NNRG.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.51%, less than FCCM.NEO's 0.82% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
FCCM.NEO Fidelity Canadian Momentum Index ETF	0.82%	0.91%	0.91%	1.32%	1.79%	1.49%	0.78%
NNRG.NEO Ninepoint Energy ETF	0.51%	0.37%	0.39%	0.38%	9.08%	1.92%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NNRG.NEO and FCCM.NEO in my portfolio?

NNRG.NEO and FCCM.NEO have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, NNRG.NEO or FCCM.NEO?

On fees, FCCM.NEO is cheaper at 0.38% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, NNRG.NEO or FCCM.NEO?

FCCM.NEO is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 1.79% for NNRG.NEO.

What is the main difference between NNRG.NEO and FCCM.NEO?

NNRG.NEO is categorized as Energy Equities, while FCCM.NEO is Momentum. NNRG.NEO tracks S&P/TSX Capped Energy Total Return Index, while FCCM.NEO tracks Fidelity Canada Canadian Momentum Index. They also come from different issuers: Ninepoint and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 1.79% for NNRG.NEO and 0.38% for FCCM.NEO.