FFLC vs LSVD
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF vs LSV Disciplined Value ETF
Which is better, FFLC or LSVD?
LSVD has been ahead.
FFLC has a lower expense ratio. LSVD led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. LSVD is less concentrated, with 35.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.9%.
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 | FFLC | LSVD |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.38%Best | 0.40% |
| AUM | $1.2B | $678M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.01% | 0.27% |
| Holdings | 216 | 136 |
| YTD Return | +9.90% | +20.92%Best |
| 1Y Return | +14.13% | +30.07%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.06% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +15.97% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.3%Tie | 13.3%Tie |
| Max Drawdown | -19.7% | -19.3%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.8 years | $12,979 | $14,810Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 41.9% | 35.0%Best |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | LSV Asset Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Jun 2, 2020 | Dec 17, 2024 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 18, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.8 years).
FFLC vs LSVD 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 1.8 years both funds cover.
FFLC vs LSVD Performance
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and LSV Disciplined Value ETF (LSVD) is an ETF from LSV Asset Management. Over the past year FFLC returned +14.13% while LSVD returned +30.07%. Year to date, FFLC is up 9.90% versus a gain of 20.92% for LSVD.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FFLC and LSVD have been equally volatile, both at 13.3% annualized.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -19.7% for FFLC and -19.3% for LSVD. 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
FFLC charges 0.38% per year while LSVD charges 0.40%. On a $10,000 position that is $38 vs $40 annually, a gap of $2 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FFLC currently yields 1.01% against 0.27% for LSVD.
Holdings Overlap
52.7% of FFLC's money is in holdings LSVD also owns. 44.2% of LSVD's money is in holdings FFLC also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
28 positions in common, counted across the 108 positions we hold weights for in FFLC and 135 in LSVD, against full books of 216 and 136.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 105 positions for LSVD that do not appear in our book for FFLC (55.4% of the fund), and 68 for FFLC that do not appear in LSVD (39.0%).
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 FFLC | Weight in LSVD | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.82% | 6.81% | 2.01% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 6.67% | 3.61% | 3.06% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 4.44% | 5.62% | 1.18% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 5.51% | 3.67% | 1.84% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.64% | 3.33% | 1.31% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 3.11% | 2.80% | 0.31% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.17% | 1.07% | 1.10% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 0.41% | 2.21% | 1.80% |
| XOMExxonmobil Corp. | 2.06% | 0.50% | 1.56% |
| DELLDell Technologies Inc | 0.36% | 1.99% | 1.63% |
52.7% of FFLC is already inside LSVD.
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, FFLC or LSVD?
FFLC has an expense ratio of 0.38% while LSVD charges 0.40%. FFLC is the cheaper option, by $2 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FFLC or LSVD?
Over the past year FFLC returned +14.13% vs +30.07% for LSVD, so LSVD leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), FFLC annualized +15.59% vs +24.38% for LSVD. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FFLC or LSVD?
FFLC and LSVD have been equally volatile, both at 13.3% annualized. Worst drawdown: FFLC -19.7% vs LSVD -19.3%.
Should I hold both FFLC and LSVD?
FFLC and LSVD 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 FFLC and LSVD?
52.7% of FFLC's money is in holdings LSVD also owns. 44.2% of LSVD's is in holdings FFLC also owns. They hold 28 positions in common, counted across the 108 positions we hold weights for in FFLC and 135 in LSVD.
Which pays a higher dividend, FFLC or LSVD?
FFLC yields 1.01% while LSVD yields 0.27%, so FFLC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is LSVD better than FFLC?
FFLC has a lower expense ratio. LSVD led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. LSVD is less concentrated, with 35.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.