PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PLDR vs. FFLC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PLDR vs. FFLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Putnam Sustainable Leaders ETF (PLDR) and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PLDR achieves a 4.85% return, which is significantly lower than FFLC's 10.26% return.


PLDR

1D
-0.20%
1M
4.50%
YTD
4.85%
6M
4.09%
1Y
20.39%
3Y*
18.32%
5Y*
9.82%
10Y*

FFLC

1D
-0.68%
1M
3.15%
YTD
10.26%
6M
11.18%
1Y
26.96%
3Y*
23.20%
5Y*
15.85%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PLDR vs. FFLC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
PLDR
Putnam Sustainable Leaders ETF
4.85%12.03%23.47%27.47%-22.52%11.57%
FFLC
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF
10.26%17.67%27.89%25.07%-0.04%2.47%

Correlation

The correlation between PLDR and FFLC is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.92

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.92

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 27, 2021

0.87

The correlation between PLDR and FFLC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

PLDR vs. FFLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
PLDR
FFLC

Technology

24.1%
32.3%

Communication Services

12.0%
11.8%

Consumer Cyclical

8.8%
10.9%

Industrials

8.3%
10.8%

Financial Services

6.9%
11.3%

Consumer Defensive

5.2%
4.1%

Healthcare

4.9%
8.1%

Utilities

2.9%
2.6%

Energy

2.8%
4.8%

Basic Materials

2.4%
1.8%

Real Estate

0.9%
1.1%

Technology

PLDR
24.1%
FFLC
32.3%

Communication Services

PLDR
12.0%
FFLC
11.8%

Consumer Cyclical

PLDR
8.8%
FFLC
10.9%

Industrials

PLDR
8.3%
FFLC
10.8%

Financial Services

PLDR
6.9%
FFLC
11.3%

Consumer Defensive

PLDR
5.2%
FFLC
4.1%

Healthcare

PLDR
4.9%
FFLC
8.1%

Utilities

PLDR
2.9%
FFLC
2.6%

Energy

PLDR
2.8%
FFLC
4.8%

Basic Materials

PLDR
2.4%
FFLC
1.8%

Real Estate

PLDR
0.9%
FFLC
1.1%

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

PLDR vs. FFLC — Risk / Return Rank

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

PLDR
PLDR Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
PLDR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PLDR Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
PLDR Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
PLDR Calmar Ratio Rank: 3333
Calmar Ratio Rank
PLDR Martin Ratio Rank: 3838
Martin Ratio Rank

FFLC
FFLC Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
FFLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FFLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
FFLC Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
FFLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
FFLC Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

PLDR vs. FFLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Putnam Sustainable Leaders ETF (PLDR) and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC). 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.


PLDRFFLCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.46

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.57

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.38

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.60

2.71

-1.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.04

12.30

-6.25

PLDR vs. FFLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PLDR Sharpe Ratio is 1.66, which is comparable to the FFLC Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PLDR and FFLC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


PLDRFFLCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.66

2.12

-0.46

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.58

0.94

-0.36

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.58

1.17

-0.59

Drawdowns

PLDR vs. FFLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PLDR drawdown since its inception was -29.58%, which is greater than FFLC's maximum drawdown of -19.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PLDR and FFLC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PLDRFFLCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-29.58%

-19.72%

-9.86%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.81%

-9.98%

-2.83%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.00%

-19.72%

-3.28%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.58%

-19.72%

-9.86%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.20%

-0.68%

+0.48%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.59%

-2.99%

-5.60%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.38%

2.20%

+1.18%

Volatility

PLDR vs. FFLC - Volatility Comparison

Putnam Sustainable Leaders ETF (PLDR) and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) have volatilities of 3.19% and 3.15%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PLDRFFLCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.19%

3.15%

+0.04%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.56%

9.73%

-0.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.38%

12.80%

-0.42%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.07%

16.92%

+0.15%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.04%

17.65%

-0.61%

PLDR vs. FFLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

PLDR has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than FFLC's 0.38% expense ratio.


Dividends

PLDR vs. FFLC - Dividend Comparison

PLDR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.36%, less than FFLC's 1.00% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
FFLC
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF
1.00%1.10%0.82%0.57%1.67%1.68%0.89%
PLDR
Putnam Sustainable Leaders ETF
0.36%0.37%0.38%0.56%0.63%0.39%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.92, PLDR and FFLC 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.

PLDR has higher volatility (3.19%) compared to FFLC (3.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PLDR dropped -29.58% vs FFLC's -19.72%.

On 5-year performance, FFLC leads with 15.85% vs 9.82% for PLDR. On fees, FFLC is cheaper at 0.38% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FFLC has performed better with a 15.85% return vs 9.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FFLC is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for PLDR.

FFLC has the higher dividend yield at 1.00%, compared with 0.36% for PLDR.

PLDR is categorized as Sustainable, while FFLC is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Power Corporation of Canada and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for PLDR and 0.38% for FFLC.

FFLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.12 vs 1.66), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PLDR and FFLC

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