SMH vs. FFLC
SMH (VanEck Semiconductor ETF) and FFLC (Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SMH is a Semiconductors fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Semiconductor 25 Index, while FFLC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. SMH is passively managed, while FFLC is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, SMH returned 37.89%/yr vs 15.52%/yr for FFLC. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SMH charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for FFLC.
Performance
SMH vs. FFLC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SMH achieves a 66.10% return, which is significantly higher than FFLC's 8.51% return.
SMH
- 1D
- 5.00%
- 1M
- 5.58%
- YTD
- 66.10%
- 6M
- 62.81%
- 1Y
- 137.42%
- 3Y*
- 60.43%
- 5Y*
- 37.89%
- 10Y*
- 36.92%
FFLC
- 1D
- 0.33%
- 1M
- -0.24%
- YTD
- 8.51%
- 6M
- 9.11%
- 1Y
- 23.62%
- 3Y*
- 22.38%
- 5Y*
- 15.52%
- 10Y*
- —
SMH vs. FFLC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF | 66.10% | 49.17% | 39.10% | 73.38% | -33.53% | 42.13% | 47.43% |
FFLC Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF | 8.51% | 17.67% | 27.89% | 25.07% | -0.04% | 24.53% | 18.76% |
Correlation
The correlation between SMH and FFLC is 0.75, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.75 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2020 | 0.69 |
The correlation between SMH and FFLC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.
SMH vs. FFLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
SMH
FFLC
Technology
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Utilities
-
Technology
SMH
FFLC
Basic Materials
SMH
-
FFLC
Communication Services
SMH
-
FFLC
Consumer Cyclical
SMH
-
FFLC
Consumer Defensive
SMH
-
FFLC
Energy
SMH
-
FFLC
Financial Services
SMH
-
FFLC
Healthcare
SMH
-
FFLC
Industrials
SMH
-
FFLC
Real Estate
SMH
-
FFLC
Utilities
SMH
-
FFLC
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
SMH vs. FFLC — Risk / Return Rank
SMH
FFLC
SMH vs. FFLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) 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.
| SMH | FFLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.46 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.86 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.62 | 1.33 | +0.29 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 9.26 | 2.38 | +6.88 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 34.80 | 10.72 | +24.08 |
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
| SMH | FFLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.27 | 1.81 | +2.46 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.08 | 0.92 | +0.16 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 1.13 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.33 | 1.15 | -0.82 |
Drawdowns
SMH vs. FFLC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SMH drawdown since its inception was -84.96%, which is greater than FFLC's maximum drawdown of -19.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMH and FFLC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SMH | FFLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -84.96% | -19.72% | -65.24% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.93% | -9.98% | -4.95% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -35.74% | -19.72% | -16.02% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -45.30% | -19.72% | -25.58% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -45.30% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.23% | -2.38% | -3.85% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -41.07% | -2.99% | -38.08% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.96% | 2.21% | +1.75% |
Volatility
SMH vs. FFLC - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Semiconductor ETF (SMH) has a higher volatility of 15.45% compared to Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) at 3.95%. This indicates that SMH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FFLC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SMH | FFLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 15.45% | 3.95% | +11.50% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 26.71% | 10.15% | +16.56% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 32.42% | 13.11% | +19.31% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 35.32% | 16.97% | +18.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 32.75% | 17.67% | +15.08% |
SMH vs. FFLC - Expense Ratio Comparison
SMH has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than FFLC's 0.38% expense ratio.
Dividends
SMH vs. FFLC - Dividend Comparison
SMH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.18%, less than FFLC's 1.01% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FFLC Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF | 1.01% | 1.10% | 0.82% | 0.57% | 1.67% | 1.68% | 0.89% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SMH VanEck Semiconductor ETF | 0.18% | 0.31% | 0.44% | 0.60% | 1.18% | 0.51% | 0.69% | 1.50% | 1.88% | 1.43% | 0.80% | 2.14% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SMH and FFLC have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SMH has higher volatility (15.45%) compared to FFLC (3.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMH dropped -84.96% vs FFLC's -19.72%.
On 5-year performance, SMH leads with 37.89% vs 15.52% for FFLC. On fees, SMH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, FFLC has been the lower-risk option at 3.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, SMH has performed better with a 37.89% return vs 15.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SMH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.38% for FFLC.
FFLC has the higher dividend yield at 1.01%, compared with 0.18% for SMH.
SMH is categorized as Semiconductors, while FFLC is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for SMH and 0.38% for FFLC.
SMH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.27 vs 1.81), 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.
Find the right allocation for SMH 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