FMAT ranks 2nd and RSPM 8th of 14 funds in the Materials (Broad) Category.
FMAT vs RSPM
FMAT −0.32pt a year
0.08%0.40%
FMAT 2.3×the volume
57.1K25.2K
RSPM +1.1pt
+10.1%+11.2%
FMAT vs RSPM Performance
+34.2%+31.4%
- FMAT 0.08%, better
- RSPM 0.40%
- FMAT $574M
- RSPM $184M
- FMAT +18.7%
- RSPM +29.5%, better
- FMAT 1.40%
- RSPM 1.71%, better
- FMAT 107
- RSPM 27
- FMAT 57.1K sh, better
- RSPM 25.2K sh
- FMAT $58.45
- RSPM $40.36
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | FMAT | RSPM |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A95Higher | D31 |
| Mission | A77 | |
| Risk | B57 | B65Higher |
| Tradability | B55Higher | D37 |
| Holdings | C48 | A70Higher |
| Durability | C52Higher | C42 |
Rank among Materials (Broad) funds
Same Category. FMAT and RSPM are both graded against the same 14 Materials (Broad) funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
FMATA
RSPMC
In short
FMAT The whole US materials sector in one cheap wrapper: chemicals, industrial gases, miners and packagers, roughly 120 names spanning large down to small caps, for 0.08% a year. Fidelity has run it since 2013.
RSPM Materials, cut into even slices. RSPM gives every materials stock in the S&P 500 the same weight, so the sector's smallest name counts as much as its largest, and it has run that way since 2006.
Stated mandate
FMAT The fund seeks to provide returns that generally correspond, before fees and expenses, to the MSCI USA IMI Materials Index.
RSPM The fund tracks an index that equally weights stocks in the materials sector of the S&P 500® Index.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
FMAT vs RSPM Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
FMAT vs RSPM Cost
Overpaying RSPM vs FMAT
$6,317
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
FMAT 0.084%
$1,773
RSPM 0.40%
$8,090
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | FMAT | RSPM | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $154 | $723 | $569 |
| 20 | $603 | $2,793 | $2,190 |
| 30 | $1,773 | $8,090 | $6,317 |
- 0.08%FMAT, cheaper
- 0.40%RSPM
- Middle half of Materials (Broad) funds
- Median 0.37%
FMAT 2nd cheapest of 14 funds
RSPM 11th cheapest of 14 funds
FMAT vs RSPM Dividends
- FMAT 1.40%
- RSPM 1.71%, better
- FMAT $0.82
- RSPM $0.69
- FMAT $0.20
- RSPM $0.18
- FMAT Sep 18, 2026
- RSPM Sep 21, 2026
- FMAT Sep 22, 2026
- RSPM Sep 25, 2026
- FMAT Quarterly
- RSPM Quarterly
Distribution history
FMAT vs RSPM Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
- FMAT
- RSPM
Risk facts
- Volatility
- FMAT 17.3%RSPM 17.3%Same figure. Both funds show the same value, so neither comes out ahead.
- Return per unit of risk
- FMAT 0.54RSPM 0.55, better
- Worst fall
- FMAT −25.4%, betterRSPM −27.2%
- Market sensitivity
- FMAT 0.98RSPM 0.83
Popular comparisons
- 0.08% · 0.08%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.40% · 0.08%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.08% · 0.09%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.40% · 0.09%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.08% · 0.35%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.40% · 0.35%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.