ABLD vs FFLC
Abacus FCF Real Assets Leaders ETF vs Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF
Which is better, ABLD or FFLC?
FFLC has been ahead.
FFLC has a lower expense ratio. FFLC led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. ABLD is less concentrated, with 35.5% 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 | ABLD | FFLC |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.39% | 0.38%Best |
| AUM | $99M | $1.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 3.37% | 0.97% |
| Holdings | 51 | 216 |
| YTD Return | +8.40% | +11.33%Best |
| 1Y Return | +12.95% | +15.48%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +9.74% | +23.04%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +16.66% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.1% | 15.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -19.4%Best | -19.7% |
| $10,000 over 4.8 years | $16,495 | $21,589Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 35.5%Best | 41.9% |
| Fund Family | Donoghue Forlines ETFs | Fidelity Investments (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Dec 13, 2021 | Jun 2, 2020 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 4.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 14, 2021 to Oct 12, 2026 (4.8 years).
ABLD vs FFLC 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 4.8 years both funds cover.
ABLD vs FFLC Performance
Abacus FCF Real Assets Leaders ETF (ABLD) is an ETF from Donoghue Forlines ETFs and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US). Over the past year ABLD returned +12.95% while FFLC returned +15.48%. Year to date, ABLD is up 8.40% versus a gain of 11.33% for FFLC.
Over three years, ABLD compounded at +9.74% per year against +23.04% for FFLC.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ABLD has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.1% compared with 15.5% for FFLC. 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 -19.4% for ABLD and -19.7% for FFLC. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.76. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ABLD charges 0.39% per year while FFLC charges 0.38%. On a $10,000 position that is $39 vs $38 annually, a gap of $1 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ABLD currently yields 3.37% against 0.97% for FFLC.
Holdings Overlap
14.4% of ABLD's money is in holdings FFLC also owns. 7.0% of FFLC's money is in holdings ABLD also owns.
ABLD and FFLC share little of their money.
8 positions in common, counted across the 50 positions we hold weights for in ABLD and 108 in FFLC, against full books of 51 and 216.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 89 positions for FFLC that do not appear in our book for ABLD (85.5% of the fund), and 25 for ABLD that do not appear in FFLC (54.9%).
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 ABLD | Weight in FFLC | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NEMNewmont Corp Common | 3.67% | 0.38% | 3.29% |
| XOMExxonmobil Holdings Corp Common Stock Usd | 1.17% | 2.06% | 0.89% |
| MPLXMplx Lp | 2.35% | 0.30% | 2.05% |
| AOSAo Smith Corp. | 2.17% | 0.47% | 1.70% |
| IMO:CAImperial Oil Ltd | 1.57% | 0.87% | 0.70% |
| SHELShell Plc | 1.06% | 1.25% | 0.19% |
| ALSNAllison Transmission Holdings Inc. | 1.37% | 0.74% | 0.63% |
| GEVGe Vernova, Inc. | 1.01% | 0.90% | 0.11% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of ABLD and FFLC 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, ABLD or FFLC?
ABLD has an expense ratio of 0.39% while FFLC charges 0.38%. FFLC is the cheaper option, by $1 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ABLD or FFLC?
Over the past year ABLD returned +12.95% vs +15.48% for FFLC, so FFLC leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ABLD or FFLC?
ABLD has been the more volatile fund at 17.1% annualized versus 15.5% for FFLC. Worst drawdown: ABLD -19.4% vs FFLC -19.7%.
Should I hold both ABLD and FFLC?
ABLD and FFLC have a monthly-return correlation of 0.76, 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 ABLD and FFLC?
14.4% of ABLD's money is in holdings FFLC also owns. 7.0% of FFLC's is in holdings ABLD also owns. They hold 8 positions in common, counted across the 50 positions we hold weights for in ABLD and 108 in FFLC.
Which pays a higher dividend, ABLD or FFLC?
ABLD yields 3.37% while FFLC yields 0.97%, so ABLD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is FFLC better than ABLD?
FFLC has a lower expense ratio. FFLC led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. ABLD is less concentrated, with 35.5% 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.