ARKW vs FMAG
ARK Next Generation Technology ETF vs Fidelity Magellan ETF
Which is better, ARKW or FMAG?
Each has led over a different period.
FMAG has a lower expense ratio. ARKW led over 3Y, FMAG over 1Y, 5Y and the full window. FMAG is less concentrated, with 44.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.6%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ARKW | FMAG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.76% | 0.57%Best |
| AUM | $2.0B | $243M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.47% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 88 | 52 |
| YTD Return | +7.08%Best | +4.66% |
| 1Y Return | -5.81% | +3.01%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +44.31%Best | +17.63% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +2.38% | +9.04%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 40.3% | 17.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -80.0% | -32.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $11,248 | $15,414Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 44.6% | 44.0%Best |
| Fund Family | Ark Invest | Fidelity Investments (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Sep 30, 2014 | Feb 2, 2021 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 4, 2021 to Oct 14, 2026 (5.7 years).
ARKW vs FMAG growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 5.7 years both funds cover.
ARKW vs FMAG Performance
ARK Next Generation Technology ETF (ARKW) is an ETF from Ark Invest and Fidelity Magellan ETF (FMAG) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US). Over the past year ARKW returned -5.81% while FMAG returned +3.01%. Year to date, ARKW is up 7.08% versus a gain of 4.66% for FMAG.
Over three years, ARKW compounded at +44.31% per year against +17.63% for FMAG; over five years the annualized figures are +2.38% and +9.04% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, FMAG has the edge at +10.77% annualized vs -0.72%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ARKW has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 40.3% compared with 17.8% for FMAG. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -80.0% for ARKW and -32.9% for FMAG. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.73. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ARKW charges 0.76% per year while FMAG charges 0.57%. On a $10,000 position that is $76 vs $57 annually, a gap of $19 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ARKW currently yields 1.47% against 0.00% for FMAG.
Holdings Overlap
19.2% of ARKW's money is in holdings FMAG also owns. 29.7% of FMAG's money is in holdings ARKW also owns.
FMAG and ARKW share little of their money.
6 positions in common, counted across the 40 positions we hold weights for in ARKW and 50 in FMAG, against full books of 88 and 52.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 44 positions for FMAG that do not appear in our book for ARKW (69.7% of the fund), and 31 for ARKW that do not appear in FMAG (72.6%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
29.7% of FMAG is already inside ARKW.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ARKW or FMAG?
ARKW has an expense ratio of 0.76% while FMAG charges 0.57%. FMAG is the cheaper option, by $19 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ARKW or FMAG?
Over the past year ARKW returned -5.81% vs +3.01% for FMAG, so FMAG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), ARKW annualized -0.72% vs +10.77% for FMAG. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ARKW or FMAG?
ARKW has been the more volatile fund at 40.3% annualized versus 17.8% for FMAG. Worst drawdown: ARKW -80.0% vs FMAG -32.9%.
Should I hold both ARKW and FMAG?
ARKW and FMAG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.73, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between ARKW and FMAG?
29.7% of FMAG's money is in holdings ARKW also owns. 29.7% of FMAG's is in holdings ARKW also owns. They hold 6 positions in common, counted across the 40 positions we hold weights for in ARKW and 50 in FMAG.
Which pays a higher dividend, ARKW or FMAG?
ARKW yields 1.47% while FMAG yields 0.00%, so ARKW currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is FMAG better than ARKW?
FMAG has a lower expense ratio. ARKW led over 3Y, FMAG over 1Y, 5Y and the full window. FMAG is less concentrated, with 44.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.