PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
SIZE vs. FFSM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

SIZE vs. FFSM

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

SIZE (iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF) and FFSM (Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. SIZE is passively managed, while FFSM is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, SIZE returned 7.87%/yr vs 10.98%/yr for FFSM. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SIZE charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.43%/yr for FFSM.

Performance

SIZE vs. FFSM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF (SIZE) and Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF (FFSM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SIZE achieves a 9.38% return, which is significantly lower than FFSM's 22.47% return.

SIZE

1D
0.52%
1M
1.26%
YTD
9.38%
6M
7.68%
1Y
16.53%
3Y*
15.72%
5Y*
7.87%
10Y*
12.06%

FFSM

1D
0.64%
1M
5.51%
YTD
22.47%
6M
19.44%
1Y
39.96%
3Y*
22.39%
5Y*
10.98%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SIZE vs. FFSM - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
SIZE
iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF		9.38%10.51%14.37%17.78%-15.86%22.22%
FFSM
Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF		22.47%14.89%14.38%17.30%-16.35%20.44%

Correlation

The correlation between SIZE and FFSM is 0.82, 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

0.82

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

0.89

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

0.92

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 4, 2021

0.92

The correlation between SIZE and FFSM shifts across timeframes, from 0.82 (1 year) to 0.92 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

SIZE vs. FFSM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
SIZE
FFSM

Technology

20.0%
14.0%

Industrials

15.3%
29.5%

Financial Services

14.7%
22.7%

Consumer Cyclical

11.2%
12.2%

Healthcare

10.7%
9.1%

Utilities

5.4%
1.8%

Consumer Defensive

5.3%
2.3%

Real Estate

5.3%
0.0%

Basic Materials

4.3%
6.2%

Communication Services

3.9%

-

Energy

3.7%
2.2%

Technology

SIZE
20.0%
FFSM
14.0%

Industrials

SIZE
15.3%
FFSM
29.5%

Financial Services

SIZE
14.7%
FFSM
22.7%

Consumer Cyclical

SIZE
11.2%
FFSM
12.2%

Healthcare

SIZE
10.7%
FFSM
9.1%

Utilities

SIZE
5.4%
FFSM
1.8%

Consumer Defensive

SIZE
5.3%
FFSM
2.3%

Real Estate

SIZE
5.3%
FFSM
0.0%

Basic Materials

SIZE
4.3%
FFSM
6.2%

Communication Services

SIZE
3.9%
FFSM

-

Energy

SIZE
3.7%
FFSM
2.2%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF

Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF

Often compared with SIZE:
SIZE vs. XLGSIZE vs. SPYSIZE vs. QUALSIZE vs. QDVA.DESIZE vs. VIGSIZE vs. VOOSIZE vs. IJH
Often compared with FFSM:
FFSM vs. FFLGFFSM vs. FFLVFFSM vs. AVUVFFSM vs. VIOGFFSM vs. FFLCFFSM vs. FCPGXFFSM vs. VOO

Return for Risk

SIZE vs. FFSM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
SIZE
SIZE Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
SIZE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SIZE Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
SIZE Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
SIZE Calmar Ratio Rank: 4646
Calmar Ratio Rank
SIZE Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank
FFSM
FFSM Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
FFSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FFSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
FFSM Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
FFSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
FFSM Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
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.

SIZE vs. FFSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF (SIZE) and Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF (FFSM). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

SIZEFFSMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.28
2.16

-0.87

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.90
3.01

-1.11

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.23

1.37

-0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.08

3.87

-1.79

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.05

15.58

-7.53

SIZE vs. FFSM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SIZE Sharpe Ratio is 1.28, which is lower than the FFSM Sharpe Ratio of 2.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SIZE and FFSM, 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...

Drawdowns

SIZE vs. FFSM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SIZE drawdown since its inception was -39.15%, which is greater than FFSM's maximum drawdown of -26.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SIZE and FFSM.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

SIZEFFSMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-39.15%

-26.65%

-12.50%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.97%

-10.37%

+2.40%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.71%

-24.78%

+6.07%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.03%

-26.65%

+2.62%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.15%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.08%

-0.87%

-0.21%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.17%

-7.78%

+3.61%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.06%

2.57%

-0.51%

Volatility

SIZE vs. FFSM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF (SIZE) is 3.78%, while Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF (FFSM) has a volatility of 6.37%. This indicates that SIZE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FFSM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

SIZEFFSMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.78%

6.37%

-2.59%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.84%

14.65%

-4.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.96%

18.63%

-5.67%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.43%

20.76%

-3.33%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.69%

20.61%

-1.92%

SIZE vs. FFSM - Expense Ratio Comparison

SIZE has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than FFSM's 0.43% expense ratio.

Dividends

SIZE vs. FFSM - Dividend Comparison

SIZE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.39%, more than FFSM's 0.43% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FFSM
Fidelity Fundamental Small-Mid Cap ETF		0.43%0.56%0.62%0.56%0.58%0.37%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
SIZE
iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF		1.39%1.50%1.53%1.42%1.59%1.19%1.43%1.35%2.43%1.58%1.88%1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

SIZE and FFSM have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FFSM has higher volatility (6.37%) compared to SIZE (3.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SIZE dropped -39.15% vs FFSM's -26.65%.

On 5-year performance, FFSM leads with 10.98% vs 7.87% for SIZE. On fees, SIZE is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, SIZE has been the lower-risk option at 3.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FFSM has performed better with a 10.98% return vs 7.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SIZE is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.43% for FFSM.

SIZE has the higher dividend yield at 1.39%, compared with 0.43% for FFSM.

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for SIZE and 0.43% for FFSM.

FFSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 1.28), 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 SIZE and FFSM

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