FMAT vs QQQ
Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, FMAT or QQQ?
Mid Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
FMAT has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.2%.
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 | FMAT | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.08%Best | 0.18% |
| AUM | $579M | $486.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.46% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 104 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +12.41% | +17.54%Best |
| 1Y Return | +15.81% | +25.59%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +11.01% | +24.63%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.77% | +14.18%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.1% | 18.0%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -43.9% | -35.1%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $13,875 | $19,407Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 57.2% | 46.5%Best |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Oct 21, 2013 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 24, 2013 to Sep 4, 2026 (12.9 years).
FMAT vs QQQ 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 12.9 years both funds cover.
FMAT vs QQQ Performance
Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year FMAT returned +15.81% while QQQ returned +25.59%. Year to date, FMAT is up 12.41% versus a gain of 17.54% for QQQ.
Over three years, FMAT compounded at +11.01% per year against +24.63% for QQQ; over five years the annualized figures are +6.77% and +14.18% respectively. Across the full 13-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +18.65% annualized vs +7.78%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FMAT has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.1% compared with 18.0% for QQQ. 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 -43.9% for FMAT and -35.1% for QQQ. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.65. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FMAT charges 0.08% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $8 vs $18 annually, a gap of $10 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FMAT currently yields 1.46% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
14.9% of FMAT's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 1.0% of QQQ's money is in holdings FMAT also owns.
FMAT and QQQ share little of their money.
1 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in FMAT and 102 in QQQ, against full books of 104 and 107.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 93 positions for QQQ that do not appear in our book for FMAT (95.8% of the fund), and 90 for FMAT that do not appear in QQQ (70.5%).
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 FMAT | Weight in QQQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| LINLinde Plc Ordinary Shares | 14.87% | 1.00% | 13.87% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of FMAT and QQQ 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, FMAT or QQQ?
FMAT has an expense ratio of 0.08% while QQQ charges 0.18%. FMAT is the cheaper option, by $10 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FMAT or QQQ?
Over the past year FMAT returned +15.81% vs +25.59% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (13 years), FMAT annualized +7.78% vs +18.65% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FMAT or QQQ?
FMAT has been the more volatile fund at 19.1% annualized versus 18.0% for QQQ. Worst drawdown: FMAT -43.9% vs QQQ -35.1%.
Should I hold both FMAT and QQQ?
FMAT and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.65, 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 FMAT and QQQ?
14.9% of FMAT's money is in holdings QQQ also owns. 1.0% of QQQ's is in holdings FMAT also owns. They hold 1 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in FMAT and 102 in QQQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, FMAT or QQQ?
FMAT yields 1.46% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so FMAT currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than FMAT?
FMAT has a lower expense ratio. QQQ led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. QQQ is less concentrated, with 46.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.