XLB vs. FMAT

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

XLB (Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF) and FMAT (Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF) are both Materials funds - XLB tracks the Materials Select Sector Index while FMAT tracks the MSCI USA IMI Materials Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XLB returned 10.60%/yr vs 10.65%/yr for FMAT. With a 0.98 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. XLB charges 0.13%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for FMAT.

Performance

XLB vs. FMAT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLB) and Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XLB achieves a 14.76% return, which is significantly higher than FMAT's 13.14% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with XLB having a 10.60% annualized return and FMAT not far ahead at 10.65%.

XLB

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 3.03%
• YTD: 14.76%
• 6M: 13.96%
• 1Y: 22.26%
• 3Y*: 11.14%
• 5Y*: 6.85%
• 10Y*: 10.60%

FMAT

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 2.69%
• YTD: 13.14%
• 6M: 11.75%
• 1Y: 24.48%
• 3Y*: 11.90%
• 5Y*: 7.20%
• 10Y*: 10.65%

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

XLB vs. FMAT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XLB Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF	14.76%	9.94%	0.15%	12.46%	-12.30%	27.44%	20.46%	24.13%	-14.88%	24.01%
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	13.14%	12.11%	0.47%	13.71%	-11.54%	27.45%	19.57%	23.35%	-17.40%	23.51%

Correlation

The correlation between XLB and FMAT is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.98
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.98
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.99
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.99
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2013	0.98

The correlation between XLB and FMAT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.98 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

XLB vs. FMAT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XLB	FMAT
Basic Materials	87.3%	89.8%
Consumer Cyclical	12.7%	8.6%
Industrials	1.5%	0.1%
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	0.1%
Energy	-	0.5%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	0.5%
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

XLB vs. FMAT — Risk / Return Rank

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

XLB

XLB Risk / Return Rank: 36
XLB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
XLB Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
XLB Omega Ratio Rank: 34
XLB Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
XLB Martin Ratio Rank: 37

FMAT

FMAT Risk / Return Rank: 37
FMAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
FMAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
FMAT Omega Ratio Rank: 35
FMAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
FMAT Martin Ratio Rank: 38

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.

XLB vs. FMAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLB) and Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT). 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.

	XLB	FMAT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.28	1.34	-0.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.87	1.93	-0.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.23	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.81	1.82	-0.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.51	5.81	-0.29

XLB vs. FMAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLB Sharpe Ratio is 1.28, which is comparable to the FMAT Sharpe Ratio of 1.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLB and FMAT, 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

XLB vs. FMAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLB drawdown since its inception was -59.83%, which is greater than FMAT's maximum drawdown of -41.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLB and FMAT.

Drawdown Indicators

	XLB	FMAT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-59.83%	-41.11%	-18.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.38%	-13.48%	+1.10%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.17%	-23.17%	0.00%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.72%	-25.40%	+0.68%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-37.27%	-41.11%	+3.84%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.94%	-3.89%	+0.95%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.82%	-6.87%	-3.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.05%	4.23%	-0.18%

Volatility

XLB vs. FMAT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLB) is 5.94%, while Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) has a volatility of 6.38%. This indicates that XLB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FMAT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XLB	FMAT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.94%	6.38%	-0.44%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.55%	14.72%	-1.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.48%	18.42%	-0.94%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.01%	19.68%	-0.67%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.71%	21.26%	-0.55%

XLB vs. FMAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLB has a 0.13% expense ratio, which is higher than FMAT's 0.08% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

XLB vs. FMAT - Dividend Comparison

XLB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.07%, more than FMAT's 1.40% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	1.40%	1.64%	1.68%	1.71%	2.00%	1.44%	1.73%	1.89%	2.18%	1.53%	1.78%	2.16%
XLB Materials Select Sector SPDR ETF	2.07%	1.92%	1.92%	2.00%	2.26%	1.62%	1.72%	1.98%	2.20%	1.66%	1.95%	2.24%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XLB and FMAT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.98, XLB and FMAT 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.

Which is riskier, XLB or FMAT?

FMAT has higher volatility (6.38%) compared to XLB (5.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XLB dropped -59.83% vs FMAT's -41.11%.

Which ETF is better, XLB or FMAT?

On 10-year performance, FMAT leads with 10.65% vs 10.60% for XLB. On fees, FMAT is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, XLB has been the lower-risk option at 5.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XLB or FMAT?

Over the 10-year period, FMAT has performed better with a 10.65% return vs 10.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XLB or FMAT?

FMAT is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.13% for XLB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XLB or FMAT?

XLB has the higher dividend yield at 2.07%, compared with 1.40% for FMAT.

What is the main difference between XLB and FMAT?

XLB tracks Materials Select Sector Index, while FMAT tracks MSCI USA IMI Materials Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.13% for XLB and 0.08% for FMAT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FMAT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.34 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.