FDRR vs ULVM
Fidelity Dividend ETF for Rising Rates vs VictoryShares US Value Momentum ETF
Which is better, FDRR or ULVM?
FDRR has been ahead.
FDRR has a lower expense ratio. FDRR led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. ULVM is less concentrated, with 13.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 45.3%.
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 | FDRR | ULVM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.15%Best | 0.20% |
| AUM | $749M | $260M |
| Dividend Yield | 2.05% | 1.81% |
| Holdings | 108 | 126 |
| YTD Return | +14.46%Best | +13.74% |
| 1Y Return | +21.24%Best | +17.70% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.78%Best | +21.11% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.09%Best | +11.11% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.9%Best | 16.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -37.6%Best | -40.8% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,498Best | $16,934 |
| Top 10 Weight | 45.3% | 13.6%Best |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | Victory Capital Management Inc. |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Sep 12, 2016 | Oct 24, 2017 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 26, 2017 to Oct 14, 2026 (9 years).
FDRR vs ULVM 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 9 years both funds cover.
FDRR vs ULVM Performance
Fidelity Dividend ETF for Rising Rates (FDRR) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and VictoryShares US Value Momentum ETF (ULVM) is an ETF from Victory Capital Management Inc.. Over the past year FDRR returned +21.24% while ULVM returned +17.70%. Year to date, FDRR is up 14.46% versus a gain of 13.74% for ULVM.
Over three years, FDRR compounded at +22.78% per year against +21.11% for ULVM; over five years the annualized figures are +13.09% and +11.11% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, FDRR has the edge at +11.81% annualized vs +9.72%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ULVM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.9% compared with 15.9% for FDRR. 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 -37.6% for FDRR and -40.8% for ULVM. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.94. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FDRR charges 0.15% per year while ULVM charges 0.20%. On a $10,000 position that is $15 vs $20 annually, a gap of $5 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FDRR currently yields 2.05% against 1.81% for ULVM.
Holdings Overlap
25.7% of FDRR's money is in holdings ULVM also owns. 22.9% of ULVM's money is in holdings FDRR also owns.
FDRR and ULVM share little of their money.
28 positions in common, counted across the 108 positions we hold weights for in FDRR and 125 in ULVM, against full books of 108 and 126.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 92 positions for ULVM that do not appear in our book for FDRR (74.3% of the fund), and 70 for FDRR that do not appear in ULVM (68.9%).
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.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in FDRR | Weight in ULVM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc Cl A | 5.03% | 0.78% | 4.25% |
| DELLDell Technologies -C | 4.50% | 0.39% | 4.11% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson | 1.58% | 1.19% | 0.39% |
| BACBank Of America Corp. | 1.18% | 0.99% | 0.19% |
| HPQHP Inc | 1.52% | 0.58% | 0.94% |
| PFEPfizer, Inc. | 0.91% | 1.12% | 0.21% |
| UNHUnitedhealth Group Incorporated | 1.36% | 0.64% | 0.72% |
| CCitigroup, Inc. | 1.08% | 0.78% | 0.30% |
| CATCaterpillar, Inc. | 1.17% | 0.63% | 0.54% |
| BMYBristol Myers Squibb Co | 0.86% | 0.86% | 0.00% |
25.7% of FDRR is already inside ULVM.
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, FDRR or ULVM?
FDRR has an expense ratio of 0.15% while ULVM charges 0.20%. FDRR is the cheaper option, by $5 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FDRR or ULVM?
Over the past year FDRR returned +21.24% vs +17.70% for ULVM, so FDRR leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), FDRR annualized +11.81% vs +9.72% for ULVM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FDRR or ULVM?
ULVM has been the more volatile fund at 16.9% annualized versus 15.9% for FDRR. Worst drawdown: FDRR -37.6% vs ULVM -40.8%.
Should I hold both FDRR and ULVM?
FDRR and ULVM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between FDRR and ULVM?
25.7% of FDRR's money is in holdings ULVM also owns. 22.9% of ULVM's is in holdings FDRR also owns. They hold 28 positions in common, counted across the 108 positions we hold weights for in FDRR and 125 in ULVM.
Which pays a higher dividend, FDRR or ULVM?
FDRR yields 2.05% while ULVM yields 1.81%, so FDRR currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is ULVM better than FDRR?
FDRR has a lower expense ratio. FDRR led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. ULVM is less concentrated, with 13.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 45.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.