FFLV vs SBIO
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Value ETF vs ALPS Medical Breakthroughs ETF
Quick Verdict
FFLV has a lower expense ratio. SBIO delivered stronger 1-year returns.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FFLV | SBIO | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.38% | 0.50% | |
| AUM | $16M | $202M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.41% | 4.05% | |
| Holdings | 119 | 87 | |
| YTD Return | +18.21% | +33.81% | |
| 1Y Return | +32.01% | +104.89% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +32.13% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +9.61% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.3% | 29.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -16.7% | -63.1% | |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | ALPS Advisors | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Feb 9, 2024 | Dec 30, 2014 |
FFLV vs SBIO Performance
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Value ETF (FFLV) is a ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and ALPS Medical Breakthroughs ETF (SBIO) is a ETF from ALPS Advisors. Over the past year FFLV returned +32.01% while SBIO returned +104.89%. Year to date, FFLV is up 18.21% versus a gain of 33.81% for SBIO.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SBIO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 29.6% 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 -16.7% for FFLV and -63.1% for SBIO. 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 0.38. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FFLV charges 0.38% per year while SBIO charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $38 vs $50 annually, a gap of $12 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FFLV currently yields 1.41% against 4.05% for SBIO.
Holdings Overlap
FFLV and SBIO share 1 holdings out of 209 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in FFLV | Weight in SBIO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AZN:LN | 0.92% | 0.00% | 0.92% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FFLV or SBIO?
FFLV has an expense ratio of 0.38% while SBIO charges 0.50%. FFLV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $12 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FFLV or SBIO?
Over the past year FFLV returned +32.01% vs +104.89% for SBIO, so SBIO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (3 years), FFLV annualized +17.65% vs +9.72% for SBIO. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FFLV or SBIO?
SBIO has been the more volatile fund at 29.6% annualized versus 12.3% for FFLV. Worst drawdown: FFLV -16.7% vs SBIO -63.1%.
Should I hold both FFLV and SBIO?
FFLV and SBIO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.38, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between FFLV and SBIO?
FFLV and SBIO share 1 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 209 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FFLV or SBIO?
FFLV yields 1.41% while SBIO yields 4.05%, so SBIO 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.