FFLC vs OAKM
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF vs Oakmark US Large Cap ETF
Which is better, FFLC or OAKM?
Each has led over a different period.
FFLC has a lower expense ratio. FFLC led over the full window, OAKM over 1Y. OAKM 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 | OAKM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.38%Best | 0.59% |
| AUM | $1.2B | $1.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.01% | 0.65% |
| Holdings | 216 | 41 |
| YTD Return | +9.90%Best | +6.05% |
| 1Y Return | +14.13% | +14.80%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.06% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +15.97% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.3% | 12.2%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -19.7% | -15.2%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.9 years | $12,538Best | $12,344 |
| Top 10 Weight | 41.9% | 35.0%Best |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | Oakmark Funds |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Jun 2, 2020 | Dec 3, 2024 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.9 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 3, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.9 years).
FFLC vs OAKM 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 1.9 years both funds cover.
FFLC vs OAKM Performance
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and Oakmark US Large Cap ETF (OAKM) is an ETF from Oakmark Funds. Over the past year FFLC returned +14.13% while OAKM returned +14.80%. Year to date, FFLC is up 9.90% versus a gain of 6.05% for OAKM.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FFLC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 13.3% compared with 12.2% for OAKM. 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 -19.7% for FFLC and -15.2% for OAKM. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.47. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FFLC charges 0.38% per year while OAKM charges 0.59%. On a $10,000 position that is $38 vs $59 annually, a gap of $21 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FFLC currently yields 1.01% against 0.65% for OAKM.
Holdings Overlap
22.1% of FFLC's money is in holdings OAKM also owns. 29.6% of OAKM's money is in holdings FFLC also owns.
OAKM and FFLC share little of their money.
11 positions in common, counted across the 108 positions we hold weights for in FFLC and 39 in OAKM, against full books of 216 and 41.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 25 positions for OAKM that do not appear in our book for FFLC (63.3% of the fund), and 85 for FFLC that do not appear in OAKM (69.6%).
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.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in FFLC | Weight in OAKM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 5.51% | 1.61% | 3.90% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 6.67% | 0.09% | 6.58% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 3.11% | 2.43% | 0.68% |
| CRMSalesforce Inc Crm Us Equity | 0.66% | 4.23% | 3.57% |
| BACBank of America Corp.: Financials | 1.65% | 3.07% | 1.42% |
| KDPKeurig Dr Pepper Inc (kdp Us) | 0.94% | 3.53% | 2.59% |
| MRKMerck & Company Inc | 0.67% | 3.49% | 2.82% |
| SCHWSchwab Strategic T | 0.70% | 2.95% | 2.25% |
| WFCWells Fargo & Co. | 1.62% | 1.97% | 0.35% |
| ICEIntercontinental Exchange Grp Usd0.01 | 0.18% | 3.32% | 3.14% |
29.6% of OAKM is already inside FFLC.
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 OAKM?
FFLC has an expense ratio of 0.38% while OAKM charges 0.59%. FFLC is the cheaper option, by $21 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FFLC or OAKM?
Over the past year FFLC returned +14.13% vs +14.80% for OAKM, so OAKM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), FFLC annualized +12.64% vs +11.72% for OAKM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FFLC or OAKM?
FFLC has been the more volatile fund at 13.3% annualized versus 12.2% for OAKM. Worst drawdown: FFLC -19.7% vs OAKM -15.2%.
Should I hold both FFLC and OAKM?
FFLC and OAKM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.47, 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 FFLC and OAKM?
29.6% of OAKM's money is in holdings FFLC also owns. 29.6% of OAKM's is in holdings FFLC also owns. They hold 11 positions in common, counted across the 108 positions we hold weights for in FFLC and 39 in OAKM.
Which pays a higher dividend, FFLC or OAKM?
FFLC yields 1.01% while OAKM yields 0.65%, so FFLC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is OAKM better than FFLC?
FFLC has a lower expense ratio. FFLC led over the full window, OAKM over 1Y. OAKM 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.