VTWG vs. FLPSX

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

VTWG (Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF) and FLPSX (Fidelity Low-Priced Stock Fund) are both funds - VTWG is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Russell 2000 Growth Index, while FLPSX is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. VTWG is passively managed, while FLPSX is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, VTWG returned 10.77%/yr vs 11.38%/yr for FLPSX. Their correlation of 0.82 means they have usually moved in the same direction. VTWG charges 0.06%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for FLPSX.

Performance

VTWG vs. FLPSX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF (VTWG) and Fidelity Low-Priced Stock Fund (FLPSX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VTWG achieves a 17.46% return, which is significantly higher than FLPSX's 15.33% return. Over the past 10 years, VTWG has underperformed FLPSX with an annualized return of 10.77%, while FLPSX has yielded a comparatively higher 11.38% annualized return.

VTWG

• 1D: 2.10%
• 1M: -2.12%
• 6M: 11.88%
• YTD: 17.46%
• 1Y: 33.76%
• 3Y*: 16.31%
• 5Y*: 5.73%
• 10Y*: 10.77%
• ALL TIME*: 11.91%

FLPSX

• 1D: -0.34%
• 1M: 2.61%
• 6M: 9.89%
• YTD: 15.33%
• 1Y: 24.71%
• 3Y*: 14.62%
• 5Y*: 9.79%
• 10Y*: 11.38%
• ALL TIME*: 12.95%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FLPSX Fidelity Low-Priced Stock Fund	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
VTWG Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF	$5.94M	$5.47M	$5.78M

VTWG vs. FLPSX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
VTWG Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF	17.46%	13.07%	15.15%	18.90%	-26.49%	2.84%	34.72%	28.75%	-9.45%	22.27%
FLPSX Fidelity Low-Priced Stock Fund	15.33%	14.69%	7.23%	14.41%	-5.69%	24.46%	9.34%	25.75%	-10.80%	18.88%

Correlation

The correlation between VTWG and FLPSX is 0.73, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.73
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.81
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.82
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2010	0.82

The correlation between VTWG and FLPSX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

VTWG vs. FLPSX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

VTWG

VTWG Risk / Return Rank: 61
VTWG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
VTWG Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
VTWG Omega Ratio Rank: 55
VTWG Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
VTWG Martin Ratio Rank: 63

FLPSX

FLPSX Risk / Return Rank: 75
FLPSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
FLPSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
FLPSX Omega Ratio Rank: 73
FLPSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
FLPSX Martin Ratio Rank: 69

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

VTWG vs. FLPSX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF (VTWG) and Fidelity Low-Priced Stock Fund (FLPSX). 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.

	VTWG	FLPSX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.50	1.86	-0.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.14	2.74	-0.60
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.33	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.28	2.61	-0.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.86	9.08	-1.22

VTWG vs. FLPSX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VTWG Sharpe Ratio is 1.50, which is comparable to the FLPSX Sharpe Ratio of 1.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VTWG and FLPSX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

VTWG vs. FLPSX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VTWG drawdown since its inception was -42.07%, smaller than the maximum FLPSX drawdown of -54.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VTWG and FLPSX.

Drawdown Indicators

	VTWG	FLPSX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.07%	-54.81%	+12.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.88%	-8.87%	-6.01%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.58%	-17.66%	-10.92%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-40.49%	-18.76%	-21.73%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-42.07%	-38.16%	-3.91%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.93%	-0.34%	-3.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.45%	-5.64%	-4.81%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.30%	2.55%	+1.75%

Volatility

VTWG vs. FLPSX - Volatility Comparison

Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF (VTWG) has a higher volatility of 6.26% compared to Fidelity Low-Priced Stock Fund (FLPSX) at 2.85%. This indicates that VTWG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLPSX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	VTWG	FLPSX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.26%	2.85%	+3.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.30%	9.00%	+8.30%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.62%	12.50%	+10.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.67%	17.12%	+7.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.28%	17.26%	+7.02%

VTWG vs. FLPSX - Expense Ratio Comparison

VTWG has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than FLPSX's 0.87% expense ratio.

Dividends

VTWG vs. FLPSX - Dividend Comparison

VTWG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.60%, less than FLPSX's 11.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLPSX Fidelity Low-Priced Stock Fund	11.52%	13.28%	16.24%	18.29%	9.45%	12.11%	11.14%	8.14%	13.45%	7.45%	4.85%	4.04%
VTWG Vanguard Russell 2000 Growth ETF	0.60%	0.64%	0.55%	0.79%	0.71%	0.54%	0.48%	0.72%	0.72%	0.64%	0.96%	0.72%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both VTWG and FLPSX in my portfolio?

VTWG and FLPSX have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, VTWG or FLPSX?

VTWG has higher volatility (6.26%) compared to FLPSX (2.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VTWG dropped -42.07% vs FLPSX's -54.81%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLPSX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 vs 1.50), 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.