FFLC vs SIXA
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF vs ETC 6 Meridian Mega Cap Equity ETF
Which is better, FFLC or SIXA?
Each has led over a different period.
FFLC has a lower expense ratio. FFLC led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, SIXA over 1Y. SIXA is less concentrated, with 34.8% 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 | SIXA |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.38%Best | 0.47% |
| AUM | $1.2B | $540M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.01% | 1.96% |
| Holdings | 216 | 150 |
| YTD Return | +9.90% | +16.78%Best |
| 1Y Return | +14.13% | +19.27%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.06%Best | +21.22% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +15.97%Best | +12.90% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.8% | 12.7%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -19.7% | -18.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $20,976Best | $18,343 |
| Top 10 Weight | 41.9% | 34.8%Best |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | 6 Meridian ETF |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Jun 2, 2020 | May 11, 2020 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 4, 2020 to Oct 14, 2026 (6.4 years).
FFLC vs SIXA 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 6.4 years both funds cover.
FFLC vs SIXA Performance
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and ETC 6 Meridian Mega Cap Equity ETF (SIXA) is an ETF from 6 Meridian ETF. Over the past year FFLC returned +14.13% while SIXA returned +19.27%. Year to date, FFLC is up 9.90% versus a gain of 16.78% for SIXA.
Over three years, FFLC compounded at +22.06% per year against +21.22% for SIXA; over five years the annualized figures are +15.97% and +12.90% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, FFLC has the edge at +19.16% annualized vs +14.78%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FFLC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.8% compared with 12.7% for SIXA. 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 -18.4% for SIXA. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.83. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FFLC charges 0.38% per year while SIXA charges 0.47%. On a $10,000 position that is $38 vs $47 annually, a gap of $9 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FFLC currently yields 1.01% against 1.96% for SIXA.
Holdings Overlap
40.0% of FFLC's money is in holdings SIXA also owns. 32.7% of SIXA's money is in holdings FFLC also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
18 positions in common, counted across the 108 positions we hold weights for in FFLC and 50 in SIXA, against full books of 216 and 150.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 32 positions for SIXA that do not appear in our book for FFLC (67.3% of the fund), and 78 for FFLC that do not appear in SIXA (51.7%).
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 SIXA | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.82% | 1.44% | 7.38% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 6.67% | 1.37% | 5.30% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 5.51% | 1.33% | 4.18% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 4.44% | 1.38% | 3.06% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 3.11% | 1.71% | 1.40% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 1.65% | 2.67% | 1.02% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 0.41% | 3.13% | 2.72% |
| XOMExxonmobil Corp. | 2.06% | 1.37% | 0.69% |
| PMPhilip Morris International Inc. | 0.70% | 2.69% | 1.99% |
| LRCXLam Research Corp | 0.16% | 3.16% | 3.00% |
40.0% of FFLC is already inside SIXA.
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 SIXA?
FFLC has an expense ratio of 0.38% while SIXA charges 0.47%. FFLC is the cheaper option, by $9 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FFLC or SIXA?
Over the past year FFLC returned +14.13% vs +19.27% for SIXA, so SIXA leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), FFLC annualized +19.16% vs +14.78% for SIXA. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FFLC or SIXA?
FFLC has been the more volatile fund at 15.8% annualized versus 12.7% for SIXA. Worst drawdown: FFLC -19.7% vs SIXA -18.4%.
Should I hold both FFLC and SIXA?
FFLC and SIXA have a monthly-return correlation of 0.83, 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 SIXA?
40.0% of FFLC's money is in holdings SIXA also owns. 32.7% of SIXA's is in holdings FFLC also owns. They hold 18 positions in common, counted across the 108 positions we hold weights for in FFLC and 50 in SIXA.
Which pays a higher dividend, FFLC or SIXA?
FFLC yields 1.01% while SIXA yields 1.96%, so SIXA currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is SIXA better than FFLC?
FFLC has a lower expense ratio. FFLC led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, SIXA over 1Y. SIXA is less concentrated, with 34.8% 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.