SMMD vs. FSGS

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

SMMD (iShares Russell 2500 ETF) and FSGS (First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds - SMMD tracks the Russell 2500 Index while FSGS tracks the SMID Growth Strength Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, SMMD returned 7.75%/yr vs 2.37%/yr for FSGS. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SMMD charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for FSGS.

Performance

SMMD vs. FSGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 2500 ETF (SMMD) and First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SMMD achieves a 18.99% return, which is significantly higher than FSGS's 2.17% return.

SMMD

• 1D: 0.52%
• 1M: 3.44%
• YTD: 18.99%
• 6M: 17.98%
• 1Y: 36.93%
• 3Y*: 19.07%
• 5Y*: 7.75%
• 10Y*: —

FSGS

• 1D: 0.88%
• 1M: 0.52%
• YTD: 2.17%
• 6M: 0.71%
• 1Y: 5.99%
• 3Y*: 7.95%
• 5Y*: 2.37%
• 10Y*: —

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

SMMD vs. FSGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SMMD iShares Russell 2500 ETF	18.99%	11.72%	11.87%	17.71%	-18.53%	18.30%	19.98%	28.01%	-10.58%	10.82%
FSGS First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF	2.17%	2.41%	6.38%	15.98%	-13.17%	25.56%	10.26%	21.31%	-11.92%	8.52%

Correlation

The correlation between SMMD and FSGS is 0.85, 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	0.85
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 10, 2017	0.83

The correlation between SMMD and FSGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

SMMD vs. FSGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SMMD	FSGS
Industrials	21.0%	22.0%
Technology	18.8%	18.8%
Financial Services	13.8%	19.5%
Healthcare	11.8%	16.7%
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	8.0%
Real Estate	6.7%	0.9%
Energy	4.9%	4.2%
Basic Materials	4.4%	1.7%
Consumer Defensive	2.8%	5.0%
Utilities	2.7%	-
Communication Services	2.5%	3.1%

Return for Risk

SMMD vs. FSGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

SMMD

SMMD Risk / Return Rank: 70
SMMD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
SMMD Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
SMMD Omega Ratio Rank: 61
SMMD Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
SMMD Martin Ratio Rank: 77

FSGS

FSGS Risk / Return Rank: 15
FSGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
FSGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
FSGS Omega Ratio Rank: 14
FSGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
FSGS Martin Ratio Rank: 16

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.

SMMD vs. FSGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2500 ETF (SMMD) and First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS). 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.

	SMMD	FSGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.16	0.39	+1.77
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.02	0.67	+2.34
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.07	+0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.84	0.53	+3.31
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.65	1.51	+13.14
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SMMD vs. FSGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SMMD Sharpe Ratio is 2.16, which is higher than the FSGS Sharpe Ratio of 0.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SMMD and FSGS, 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

	SMMD	FSGS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.16	0.39	+1.77
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.37	0.12	+0.26
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.50	0.31	+0.19

Drawdowns

SMMD vs. FSGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SMMD drawdown since its inception was -41.06%, smaller than the maximum FSGS drawdown of -43.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMMD and FSGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	SMMD	FSGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.06%	-43.26%	+2.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.66%	-11.31%	+1.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.50%	-24.08%	-1.42%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.26%	-24.08%	-4.18%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.11%	-3.89%	+3.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.37%	-8.03%	-0.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.53%	3.97%	-1.44%

Volatility

SMMD vs. FSGS - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell 2500 ETF (SMMD) has a higher volatility of 5.01% compared to First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS) at 3.65%. This indicates that SMMD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FSGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SMMD	FSGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.01%	3.65%	+1.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.58%	10.76%	+1.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.16%	15.23%	+1.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.82%	20.14%	+0.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.36%	22.80%	-0.44%

SMMD vs. FSGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

SMMD has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than FSGS's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

SMMD vs. FSGS - Dividend Comparison

SMMD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.05%, while FSGS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FSGS First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF	0.00%	0.00%	2.71%	2.29%	1.95%	1.35%	1.32%	1.77%	2.13%	1.15%
SMMD iShares Russell 2500 ETF	1.05%	1.28%	1.27%	1.44%	1.79%	1.12%	1.31%	1.50%	2.45%	0.68%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SMMD and FSGS in my portfolio?

SMMD and FSGS have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SMMD or FSGS?

SMMD has higher volatility (5.01%) compared to FSGS (3.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMMD dropped -41.06% vs FSGS's -43.26%.

Which ETF is better, SMMD or FSGS?

On 5-year performance, SMMD leads with 7.75% vs 2.37% for FSGS. On fees, SMMD is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FSGS has been the lower-risk option at 3.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SMMD or FSGS?

Over the 5-year period, SMMD has performed better with a 7.75% return vs 2.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SMMD or FSGS?

SMMD is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FSGS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SMMD or FSGS?

SMMD has the higher dividend yield at 1.05%, compared with 0.00% for FSGS.

What is the main difference between SMMD and FSGS?

SMMD tracks Russell 2500 Index, while FSGS tracks SMID Growth Strength Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for SMMD and 0.60% for FSGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SMMD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 0.39), 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.