FFLG vs GSGO
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF vs Goldman Sachs Growth Opportunities ETF
Which is better, FFLG or GSGO?
Nearly the same fund. FFLG costs less.
FFLG has a lower expense ratio. GSGO led over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.99. GSGO is less concentrated, with 53.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 54.0%.
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 | GSGO |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.38%Best | 0.45% |
| AUM | $596M | $177M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.07% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 206 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +3.26% | +4.00%Best |
| 1Y Return | +3.12% | +5.37%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.87% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.61% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 23.5% | 20.4%Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 54.0% | 53.7%Best |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | Goldman Sachs Asset Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Feb 2, 2021 | May 24, 1999 |
Not shown on this pair: Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
FFLG vs GSGO 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
FFLG vs GSGO Performance
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and Goldman Sachs Growth Opportunities ETF (GSGO) is an ETF from Goldman Sachs Asset Management. Over the past year FFLG returned +3.12% while GSGO returned +5.37%. Year to date, FFLG is up 3.26% versus a gain of 4.00% for GSGO.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FFLG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 23.5% compared with 20.4% for GSGO. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.99. 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 GSGO charges 0.45%. On a $10,000 position that is $38 vs $45 annually, a gap of $7 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FFLG currently yields 0.07% against 0.00% for GSGO.
Holdings Overlap
66.5% of FFLG's money is in holdings GSGO also owns. 71.2% of GSGO's money is in holdings FFLG also owns.
Most of GSGO is already inside FFLG. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
30 positions in common, counted across the 100 positions we hold weights for in FFLG and 53 in GSGO, against full books of 206 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 22 positions for GSGO that do not appear in our book for FFLG (24.0% of the fund), and 60 for FFLG that do not appear in GSGO (27.7%).
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 FFLG | Weight in GSGO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 9.39% | 12.24% | 2.85% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 8.27% | 9.34% | 1.07% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.93% | 7.12% | 1.19% |
| AAPLApple Inc | 9.88% | 2.28% | 7.60% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 4.63% | 5.39% | 0.76% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 3.12% | 4.22% | 1.10% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co | 4.34% | 2.84% | 1.50% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 3.03% | 3.74% | 0.71% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.49% | 2.62% | 0.13% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 2.95% | 1.07% | 1.88% |
71.2% of GSGO 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 GSGO?
FFLG has an expense ratio of 0.38% while GSGO charges 0.45%. FFLG is the cheaper option, by $7 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FFLG or GSGO?
Over the past year FFLG returned +3.12% vs +5.37% for GSGO, so GSGO leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FFLG or GSGO?
FFLG has been the more volatile fund at 23.5% annualized versus 20.4% for GSGO.
Should I hold both FFLG and GSGO?
FFLG and GSGO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.99, 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 GSGO?
71.2% of GSGO's money is in holdings FFLG also owns. 71.2% of GSGO's is in holdings FFLG also owns. They hold 30 positions in common, counted across the 100 positions we hold weights for in FFLG and 53 in GSGO.
Which pays a higher dividend, FFLG or GSGO?
FFLG yields 0.07% while GSGO yields 0.00%, so FFLG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is GSGO better than FFLG?
FFLG has a lower expense ratio. GSGO led over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.99. GSGO is less concentrated, with 53.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 54.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.