FFLG vs LCLG
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF vs Logan Capital Large Cap Growth ETF
Which is better, FFLG or LCLG?
Each has led over a different period.
FFLG has a lower expense ratio. FFLG led over 1Y and the full window, LCLG over 3Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. LCLG is less concentrated, with 45.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.3%.
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 | FFLG | LCLG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.38%Best | 0.90% |
| AUM | $635M | $108M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.07% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 202 | 114 |
| YTD Return | +11.11%Best | +10.21% |
| 1Y Return | +14.85%Best | +13.02% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +25.80% | +25.89%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.81% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 20.0% | 19.6%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -26.7% | -25.8%Best |
| $10,000 over 4.2 years | $22,650Best | $21,446 |
| Top 10 Weight | 57.3% | 45.6%Best |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | Logan Capital |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Feb 2, 2021 | Aug 8, 2022 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 4.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 8, 2022 to Oct 14, 2026 (4.2 years).
FFLG vs LCLG 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 4.2 years both funds cover.
FFLG vs LCLG Performance
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and Logan Capital Large Cap Growth ETF (LCLG) is an ETF from Logan Capital. Over the past year FFLG returned +14.85% while LCLG returned +13.02%. Year to date, FFLG is up 11.11% versus a gain of 10.21% for LCLG.
Over three years, FFLG compounded at +25.80% per year against +25.89% for LCLG. Across the full 4-year window we track, FFLG has the edge at +21.49% annualized vs +19.92%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FFLG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.0% compared with 19.6% for LCLG. 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 -26.7% for FFLG and -25.8% for LCLG. 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
FFLG charges 0.38% per year while LCLG charges 0.90%. On a $10,000 position that is $38 vs $90 annually, a gap of $52 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FFLG currently yields 0.07% against 0.00% for LCLG.
Holdings Overlap
37.2% of FFLG's money is in holdings LCLG also owns. 52.0% of LCLG's money is in holdings FFLG also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
15 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in FFLG and 55 in LCLG, against full books of 202 and 114.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 38 positions for LCLG that do not appear in our book for FFLG (46.2% of the fund), and 73 for FFLG that do not appear in LCLG (56.3%).
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 FFLG | Weight in LCLG | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 11.36% | 3.67% | 7.69% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.13% | 4.98% | 2.15% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 3.50% | 6.09% | 2.59% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 3.05% | 4.03% | 0.98% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.64% | 4.43% | 1.79% |
| APHAmphenol Corp. Class A | 0.86% | 5.98% | 5.12% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 2.88% | 3.86% | 0.98% |
| FLEXFlex Ltd. Ordinary Shares | 0.81% | 4.24% | 3.43% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 1.26% | 3.56% | 2.30% |
| ANETArista Networks Inc. | 0.66% | 2.70% | 2.04% |
52.0% of LCLG is already inside FFLG.
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, FFLG or LCLG?
FFLG has an expense ratio of 0.38% while LCLG charges 0.90%. FFLG is the cheaper option, by $52 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FFLG or LCLG?
Over the past year FFLG returned +14.85% vs +13.02% for LCLG, so FFLG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), FFLG annualized +21.49% vs +19.92% for LCLG. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FFLG or LCLG?
FFLG has been the more volatile fund at 20.0% annualized versus 19.6% for LCLG. Worst drawdown: FFLG -26.7% vs LCLG -25.8%.
Should I hold both FFLG and LCLG?
FFLG and LCLG 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 FFLG and LCLG?
52.0% of LCLG's money is in holdings FFLG also owns. 52.0% of LCLG's is in holdings FFLG also owns. They hold 15 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in FFLG and 55 in LCLG.
Which pays a higher dividend, FFLG or LCLG?
FFLG yields 0.07% while LCLG yields 0.00%, so FFLG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is LCLG better than FFLG?
FFLG has a lower expense ratio. FFLG led over 1Y and the full window, LCLG over 3Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. LCLG is less concentrated, with 45.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.