Data as of Nov 4, 2026.
FFLC vs GSLC: Differences, Returns & Fees
Over the year to Nov 4, 2026, FFLC returned +13.8% to GSLC's +13.3%; 39% of their weight is in the same names.
askIQ about this page
askIQ about FFLC and GSLC
Net assets: $1.2bn on Sep 30, 2026 for Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF, and $15.3bn on Nov 3, 2026 for Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity ETF.
Pair scorecard
GSLC costs 0.29 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 0.5 points.
| Measure | FFLC | GSLC |
|---|---|---|
| Return | ||
| Total return, 1 year | +13.8% | +13.3% |
| Benchmark | ||
| What it tracks | No index, actively managed | Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta U.S. Large Cap Equity Index |
| Cost and size | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.38% | 0.09% |
| Net assets, FFLC as of Sep 30, 2026 and GSLC as of Nov 3, 2026 | $1.2bn | $15.3bn |
| Holdings | ||
| Holdings in common | 39% | |
| Top ten holdings, share of the fund | 39.5% | 35.2% |
Risk and return
Jun 12, 2020 to Oct 30, 2026 · 333 weekly returnsEach against its own benchmark: FFLC against IWB, Jun 12, 2020 to Oct 30, 2026; GSLC against VOO, Oct 2, 2015 to Oct 30, 2026.
From Jun 2020 to Oct 2026, FFLC returned more: +217.8% to +155.2%. GSLC swung slightly less: 15.7% to 16.3%. FFLC fell less at its worst: −18.7% to −24.5%.
Full scorecard
19 measures, with how each is measured Open ↓
| Measure | FFLC | GSLC | Edge | How it is measured |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Return | ||||
| Total return | +217.8% | +155.2% | FFLC | Price change plus distributions, reinvested. |
| Annualized | +19.8% | +15.8% | FFLC | Total return as a yearly rate. |
| Price return | +194.1% | +134.8% | FFLC | Price change alone, distributions left out. |
| Risk | ||||
| Volatility | 16.3% | 15.7% | GSLC (slight) | Spread of weekly returns, annualized. Lower is steadier. |
| Downside deviation | 10.6% | 10.3% | GSLC (slight) | Like volatility, counting only weeks below the Treasury bill rate. |
| Max drawdown | −18.7% | −24.5% | FFLC | Deepest fall from a high to the low after it. |
| Upside capture | 93.2% | 96.6% | Share of its benchmark's rise caught in the weeks it rose. | |
| Downside capture | 90.7% | 99.3% | Share of its benchmark's fall taken in the weeks it fell. Lower is better. | |
| Beta | 0.92 | 0.99 | Not an edge | How far it moves for each 1% its benchmark moves. |
| R squared | 0.83 | 0.99 | Not an edge | Share of its weekly moves its benchmark explains. |
| Risk-adjusted | ||||
| Sharpe | 1.00 | 0.81 | FFLC | Return above Treasury bills per unit of volatility. |
| Sortino | 1.53 | 1.24 | FFLC | Return above Treasury bills per unit of downside deviation. |
| Treynor | 0.177 | 0.123 | Return above Treasury bills per unit of beta. | |
| Calmar | 1.06 | 0.64 | FFLC | Annualized return divided by the max drawdown. |
| Against the benchmark | ||||
| Benchmark | IWB | VOO | The ETF each fund is measured against. | |
| Alpha | +3.9% a year | −0.7% a year | Not significant | Yearly return beyond what its beta to the benchmark predicts. |
| Alpha t-stat | 1.46 | −1.43 | Not an edge | How sure the alpha is. Below 2, it could be chance. |
| Alpha range | −1.4% to +9.1% | −1.7% to +0.3% | Includes zero | The 95% range for the yearly alpha. |
| Information ratio | 0.41 | −0.49 | Return against its benchmark per unit of tracking error. | |
| Tracking error | 6.8% | 1.6% | Not an edge | How far weekly returns stray from the benchmark, annualized. |
Computed by ETFIQ from Tiingo daily prices and ETFIQ's distribution records, 333 weekly returns. Cash rate: the 13-week Treasury bill.
What they share
By the books each fund has filed, FFLC and GSLC hold 39% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Jul 31, 2026 and Aug 31, 2026.
half
39% in common
Only in one fund ↓
Side by side
FFLC and GSLC on the fields both publish, as of Nov 4, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
Client brief:
The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.
Over the year to Nov 4, 2026 it returned +13.8% with distributions reinvested, against +14.5% for its benchmark, the Russell 1000 Index.
FFLC is actively managed and tracks no index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.38% a year. By its holdings filed for Jul 31, 2026, 83% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 115 positions, with the top ten at 39.5%.
GSLC
GSLC tracks an index. Over the year to Nov 4, 2026 it returned +13.3% with distributions reinvested, against +14.8% for its benchmark, the S&P 500 Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.09% a year. By its holdings filed for Aug 31, 2026, 94% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 426 positions, with the top ten at 35.2%.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, FFLC or GSLC?
- In the year to Nov 4, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FFLC returned +13.8% and GSLC +13.3%.
- Which is cheaper, FFLC or GSLC?
- GSLC is cheaper, by 0.29 percentage points a year. That is about $29 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.
How this is computed
Overlap adds up the smaller of the two weights for each security both funds hold.
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown
ETFIQ, FFLC against GSLC, data as of Nov 4, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/fflc-vs-gslc
ETFIQ. (Nov 4, 2026). FFLC against GSLC. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/any/fflc-vs-gslc
[FFLC against GSLC (ETFIQ, Nov 4, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/any/fflc-vs-gslc)
Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.