ETW vs FFLV
Eaton Vance Tax-Managed Global Buy-Write Opportunities Fund vs Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Value ETF
Quick Verdict
FFLV has a lower expense ratio. FFLV delivered stronger 1-year returns. ETW offers more diversification with 259 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ETW | FFLV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.10% | 0.38% | |
| AUM | $936M | $16M | |
| Dividend Yield | 7.41% | 1.41% | |
| Holdings | 291 | 119 | |
| YTD Return | +11.94% | +18.17% | |
| 1Y Return | +19.77% | +30.12% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.60% | - | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.24% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.9% | 12.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -72.8% | -16.7% | |
| Fund Family | Eaton Vance | Fidelity Investments (US) | |
| Category | Alternative | Equity | |
| Inception | Sep 30, 2005 | Feb 9, 2024 |
ETW vs FFLV Performance
Eaton Vance Tax-Managed Global Buy-Write Opportunities Fund (ETW) is a ETF from Eaton Vance and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Value ETF (FFLV) is a ETF from Fidelity Investments (US). Over the past year ETW returned +19.77% while FFLV returned +30.12%. Year to date, ETW is up 11.94% versus a gain of 18.17% for FFLV.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ETW has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.9% compared with 12.3% for FFLV. 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 -72.8% for ETW and -16.7% for FFLV. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.70. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ETW charges 1.10% per year while FFLV charges 0.38%. On a $10,000 position that is $110 vs $38 annually, a gap of $72 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ETW currently yields 7.41% against 1.41% for FFLV.
Holdings Overlap
ETW and FFLV share 31 holdings out of 333 unique holdings combined, representing a 16.6% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ETW or FFLV?
ETW has an expense ratio of 1.10% while FFLV charges 0.38%. FFLV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $72 per year of difference.
Which performed better, ETW or FFLV?
Over the past year ETW returned +19.77% vs +30.12% for FFLV, so FFLV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (3 years), ETW annualized -1.09% vs +17.59% for FFLV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, ETW or FFLV?
ETW has been the more volatile fund at 16.9% annualized versus 12.3% for FFLV. Worst drawdown: ETW -72.8% vs FFLV -16.7%.
Should I hold both ETW and FFLV?
ETW and FFLV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.70, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between ETW and FFLV?
ETW and FFLV share 31 common holdings with a 16.6% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 333 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, ETW or FFLV?
ETW yields 7.41% while FFLV yields 1.41%, so ETW currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.