FSYD vs HYLS
Fidelity Sustainable High Yield ETF vs First Trust Tactical High Yield ETF
Which is better, FSYD or HYLS?
FSYD has been ahead.
FSYD has a lower expense ratio. FSYD led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94.
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 | FSYD | HYLS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.55%Best | 1.05% |
| AUM | $141M | $1.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 7.12% | 6.92% |
| Holdings | 403 | 662 |
| YTD Return | +0.27%Best | -0.95% |
| 1Y Return | +2.10%Best | +0.00% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +8.84%Best | +6.89% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +2.26% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 7.9%Tie | 7.9%Tie |
| Max Drawdown | -12.1%Best | -13.6% |
| $10,000 over 4.7 years | $12,504Best | $11,501 |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | First Trust Portfolios (US) |
| Category | Fixed Income | Fixed Income |
| Style | High Yield Bond | High Yield Bond |
| Inception | Feb 15, 2022 | Feb 25, 2013 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 4.7 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 17, 2022 to Oct 14, 2026 (4.7 years).
FSYD vs HYLS 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 4.7 years both funds cover.
FSYD vs HYLS Performance
Fidelity Sustainable High Yield ETF (FSYD) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and First Trust Tactical High Yield ETF (HYLS) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year FSYD returned +2.10% while HYLS returned +0.00%. Year to date, FSYD is up 0.27% versus a loss of 0.95% for HYLS.
Over three years, FSYD compounded at +8.84% per year against +6.89% for HYLS.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FSYD and HYLS have been equally volatile, both at 7.9% annualized.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -12.1% for FSYD and -13.6% for HYLS. 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
FSYD charges 0.55% per year while HYLS charges 1.05%. On a $10,000 position that is $55 vs $105 annually, a gap of $50 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FSYD currently yields 7.12% against 6.92% for HYLS.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of FSYD and HYLS you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FSYD or HYLS?
FSYD has an expense ratio of 0.55% while HYLS charges 1.05%. FSYD is the cheaper option, by $50 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FSYD or HYLS?
Over the past year FSYD returned +2.10% vs +0.00% for HYLS, so FSYD leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FSYD or HYLS?
FSYD and HYLS have been equally volatile, both at 7.9% annualized. Worst drawdown: FSYD -12.1% vs HYLS -13.6%.
Should I hold both FSYD and HYLS?
FSYD and HYLS 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.
Which pays a higher dividend, FSYD or HYLS?
FSYD yields 7.12% while HYLS yields 6.92%, so FSYD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is HYLS better than FSYD?
FSYD has a lower expense ratio. FSYD led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.