PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XME vs. FMAT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XME vs. FMAT - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XME achieves a 28.28% return, which is significantly higher than FMAT's 13.39% return. Over the past 10 years, XME has outperformed FMAT with an annualized return of 20.61%, while FMAT has yielded a comparatively lower 10.36% annualized return.


XME

1D
4.21%
1M
12.04%
YTD
28.28%
6M
37.76%
1Y
114.79%
3Y*
41.81%
5Y*
24.52%
10Y*
20.61%

FMAT

1D
1.33%
1M
1.16%
YTD
13.39%
6M
17.38%
1Y
24.26%
3Y*
12.50%
5Y*
5.92%
10Y*
10.36%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XME vs. FMAT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XME
SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF
28.28%83.47%-4.54%21.51%13.13%34.92%15.95%14.69%-26.78%21.17%
FMAT
Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF
13.39%12.11%0.47%13.71%-11.54%27.45%19.57%23.35%-17.40%23.51%

Correlation

The correlation between XME and FMAT is 0.72, 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

0.72

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

0.75

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

0.79

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.77

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2013

0.76

The correlation between XME and FMAT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

XME vs. FMAT - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XME
FMAT

Basic Materials

75.3%
90.1%

Energy

23.4%
0.6%

Technology

2.2%
0.1%

Consumer Defensive

0.8%
0.1%

Industrials

0.4%
0.1%

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

8.3%

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

0.5%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Basic Materials

XME
75.3%
FMAT
90.1%

Energy

XME
23.4%
FMAT
0.6%

Technology

XME
2.2%
FMAT
0.1%

Consumer Defensive

XME
0.8%
FMAT
0.1%

Industrials

XME
0.4%
FMAT
0.1%

Communication Services

XME

-

FMAT

-

Consumer Cyclical

XME

-

FMAT
8.3%

Financial Services

XME

-

FMAT

-

Healthcare

XME

-

FMAT
0.5%

Real Estate

XME

-

FMAT

-

Utilities

XME

-

FMAT

-

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

XME vs. FMAT — Risk / Return Rank

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

XME
XME Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
XME Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XME Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
XME Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
XME Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
XME Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

FMAT
FMAT Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
FMAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FMAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
FMAT Omega Ratio Rank: 3535
Omega Ratio Rank
FMAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 3737
Calmar Ratio Rank
FMAT Martin Ratio Rank: 3838
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.

XME vs. FMAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF (XME) 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.


XMEFMATDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.35

1.38

+1.97

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.71

1.97

+1.73

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.24

+0.25

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

5.40

1.84

+3.55

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

13.76

6.07

+7.69

XME vs. FMAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XME Sharpe Ratio is 3.35, which is higher than the FMAT Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XME 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XMEFMATDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.35

1.38

+1.97

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.76

0.30

+0.45

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

0.49

+0.14

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.18

0.45

-0.27

Drawdowns

XME vs. FMAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XME drawdown since its inception was -85.89%, which is greater than FMAT's maximum drawdown of -41.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XME and FMAT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XMEFMATDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-85.89%

-41.11%

-44.78%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-22.60%

-13.48%

-9.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-30.47%

-23.17%

-7.30%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.27%

-25.40%

-11.87%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-61.69%

-41.11%

-20.58%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-3.68%

+3.68%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-44.15%

-6.87%

-37.28%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

8.86%

4.09%

+4.77%

Volatility

XME vs. FMAT - Volatility Comparison

SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF (XME) has a higher volatility of 11.95% compared to Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) at 6.35%. This indicates that XME's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FMAT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XMEFMATDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.95%

6.35%

+5.60%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

26.54%

13.95%

+12.59%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

34.59%

17.66%

+16.93%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

32.51%

19.60%

+12.91%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

32.83%

21.20%

+11.63%

XME vs. FMAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

XME has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than FMAT's 0.08% expense ratio.


Dividends

XME vs. FMAT - Dividend Comparison

XME's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.29%, less than FMAT's 1.41% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FMAT
Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF
1.41%1.64%1.68%1.71%2.00%1.44%1.73%1.89%2.18%1.53%1.78%2.16%
XME
SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF
0.29%0.38%0.65%1.00%1.64%0.70%0.99%2.43%2.23%1.15%1.02%2.61%

Frequently Asked Questions


XME and FMAT have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

XME has higher volatility (11.95%) compared to FMAT (6.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XME dropped -85.89% vs FMAT's -41.11%.

On 10-year performance, XME leads with 20.61% vs 10.36% for FMAT. On fees, FMAT is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, FMAT has been the lower-risk option at 6.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, XME has performed better with a 20.61% return vs 10.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FMAT is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for XME.

FMAT has the higher dividend yield at 1.41%, compared with 0.29% for XME.

XME tracks S&P Metals & Mining Select Industry Index, while FMAT tracks MSCI USA IMI Materials Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for XME and 0.08% for FMAT.

XME currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.35 vs 1.38), 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 XME and FMAT

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