FDWM vs OMFL
Fidelity Womens Leadership ETF vs Invesco Russell 1000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF
Which is better, FDWM or OMFL?
FDWM has been ahead.
OMFL has a lower expense ratio. FDWM led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. FDWM is less concentrated, with 36.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.0%.
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 | FDWM | OMFL |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.59% | 0.29%Best |
| AUM | $5M | $4.8B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.52% | 0.84% |
| Holdings | 82 | 1,272 |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.3% | 16.6%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -29.1% | -22.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 4.4 years | $13,877Best | $13,696 |
| Top 10 Weight | 36.7%Best | 37.0% |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jun 15, 2021 | Nov 8, 2017 |
Not shown on this pair: YTD Return, 1Y Return, 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized).
The two price series end 336 days apart, so a return over any period would be measuring two different stretches of market. Those rows are withheld. FDWM has data through Nov 13, 2025 and OMFL through Oct 15, 2026.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 4.4 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 17, 2021 to Nov 13, 2025 (4.4 years).
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FDWM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.3% compared with 16.6% for OMFL. 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 -29.1% for FDWM and -22.4% for OMFL. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FDWM charges 0.59% per year while OMFL charges 0.29%. On a $10,000 position that is $59 vs $29 annually, a gap of $30 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FDWM currently yields 0.52% against 0.84% for OMFL.
Holdings Overlap
75.7% of FDWM's money is in holdings OMFL also owns. 39.0% of OMFL's money is in holdings FDWM also owns.
Most of FDWM is already inside OMFL. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
The two holdings books were reported 430 days apart, FDWM as of Jul 31, 2025 and OMFL as of Oct 4, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
55 positions in common, counted across the 86 positions we hold weights for in FDWM and 577 in OMFL, against full books of 82 and 1,272.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 494 positions for OMFL that do not appear in our book for FDWM (59.9% of the fund), and 28 for FDWM that do not appear in OMFL (21.4%).
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 FDWM | Weight in OMFL | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple, Inc | 5.91% | 9.03% | 3.12% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 7.10% | 6.62% | 0.48% |
| NVDANvidia Corp | 7.02% | 5.56% | 1.46% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.73% | 1.88% | 2.85% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 3.70% | 2.42% | 1.28% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 1.69% | 1.90% | 0.21% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 1.32% | 2.17% | 0.85% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.26% | 1.09% | 0.17% |
| GEVGe Vernova, Inc. | 1.54% | 0.77% | 0.77% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 2.12% | 0.03% | 2.09% |
75.7% of FDWM is already inside OMFL.
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, FDWM or OMFL?
FDWM has an expense ratio of 0.59% while OMFL charges 0.29%. OMFL is the cheaper option, by $30 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which is riskier, FDWM or OMFL?
FDWM has been the more volatile fund at 17.3% annualized versus 16.6% for OMFL. Worst drawdown: FDWM -29.1% vs OMFL -22.4%.
Should I hold both FDWM and OMFL?
FDWM and OMFL have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, 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 FDWM and OMFL?
75.7% of FDWM's money is in holdings OMFL also owns. 39.0% of OMFL's is in holdings FDWM also owns. They hold 55 positions in common, counted across the 86 positions we hold weights for in FDWM and 577 in OMFL.
Which pays a higher dividend, FDWM or OMFL?
FDWM yields 0.52% while OMFL yields 0.84%, so OMFL currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is OMFL better than FDWM?
OMFL has a lower expense ratio. FDWM led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. FDWM is less concentrated, with 36.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.