FNCMX vs ONEQ (2026)
Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index Fund and Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF side by side. ONEQ is the cheaper fund (0.21% vs 0.29% expense ratio). Over the last five years ONEQ returned more (+72.37% vs +71.04%, total return). Their portfolios overlap by about 98% of weight. Not investment advice.
Fund facts#
Data provided bySource: Twelve DataReturns as of market close, Oct 30, 2026. The charts run through the Oct 30 close.
| FNCMX | ONEQ | |
|---|---|---|
| Focus | US Stock Index Funds | Nasdaq Composite |
| Expense ratio | 0.29% | 0.21% |
| AUM | $28B | $10.8B |
| Distribution yield | — | 0.52% |
| Holdings | 2642 | 1010 |
| 1M total | -5.3% | -5.3% |
| YTD total | +9.9% | +10.1% |
| 1Y total | +8.4% | +8.7% |
| 3Y total | +103% | +103% |
| 5Y total | +71.0% | +72.4% |
| 10Y total | — | +438% |
| 3Y total CAGR | +26.5%/yr | +26.6%/yr |
| 5Y total CAGR | +11.3%/yr | +11.5%/yr |
| 10Y total CAGR | — | +18.3%/yr |
| Issuer | Fidelity | Fidelity |
| Inception | — | 2003-09-25 |
All returns are total returns (dividends reinvested), through the latest price during the session. CAGR = compound annual growth rate. '—' means the fund's history doesn't span the horizon. A mutual fund's AUM is its whole fund's, every share class together (its SEC filing); an ETF's is its own. Returns run to Oct 30, 2026, the last month-end, as fund companies report a mutual fund's: a fund that pays monthly books each month's income on its last business day, so a return to a later day would leave that month's income out.
Annualized returns (CAGR)#
Data provided bySource: Twelve DataCompound annual growth rate per holding period, total return, from weekly adjusted closes. Horizons a fund's history can't span show no bar; horizons no fund spans are omitted.
Performance, rebased#
Data provided bySource: Twelve DataReturns by year#
Data provided bySource: Twelve Data| Year | FNCMX | ONEQ |
|---|---|---|
| 2017 | — | +29.3% |
| 2018 | — | -3.2% |
| 2019 | — | +37.2% |
| 2020 | +44.6% | +44.9% |
| 2021 | +22.2% | +22.1% |
| 2022 | -32.4% | -32.1% |
| 2023 | +45.1% | +45.7% |
| 2024 | +29.5% | +29.3% |
| 2025 | +21.1% | +20.9% |
| 2026 YTD | +9.9% | +10.1% |
Total returns (dividends reinvested), calendar years.
Returns by year, charted#
Holdings overlap#
FNCMX and ONEQ overlap by about 98% of portfolio weight — 1000 shared holdings out of 2642 in FNCMX and 1010 in ONEQ, from each fund's latest SEC filing (Aug 31, 2026 / Aug 31, 2026).
Top 10 holdings, side by side#
Merged top 10 across the funds — each column is the holding's % of that fund.
Sector weights#
| Sector | FNCMX | ONEQ |
|---|---|---|
| Technology | 51.1% | 51.3% |
| Consumer Discretionary | 13.3% | 13.4% |
| Communication Services | 12.6% | 12.6% |
| Healthcare | 5.3% | 5.5% |
| Industrials | 5.2% | 5.2% |
| Consumer Staples | 4.9% | 5.0% |
| Financials | 2.9% | 3.0% |
| Utilities | 0.8% | 0.8% |
| Materials | 0.7% | 0.7% |
| Real Estate | 0.5% | 0.6% |
| Energy | 0.5% | 0.5% |
| Not on ChartRow | 2.1% | 1.5% |
Sector weights, charted#
Estimated portfolio characteristics#
Data provided bySource: Twelve Data| FNCMX | ONEQ | |
|---|---|---|
| P/E (trailing) | — | — |
| P/B | 6.9 | 6.8 |
| Dividend yield | 0.57% | 0.57% |
| Earnings growth (TTM) | +52.6% | +52.9% |
Weighted by each fund's filed holdings, over the members we track. Shown only when every fund's tracked coverage is high enough for the average to mean something.
Growth from any starting date#
Data provided bySource: Twelve DataHover to move the starting point — every fund rebases to 1× at that date, so the comparison holds from any entry point back to 2019 (the earliest date all 2 funds existed). Log scale, weekly total returns.
Fund flows#
| Period | FNCMX | ONEQ |
|---|---|---|
| Aug 2026 | −$51.9M | −$10.4M |
| Jul 2026 | +$646.8M | +$40.1K |
| Jun 2026 | +$11.7M | +$68.9M |
| May 2026 | — | +$72.2M |
| Apr 2026 | — | +$94.5M |
| Mar 2026 | — | +$12.6M |
Net creations minus redemptions, derived from consecutive SEC N-PORT filings. The form only exists since mid-2019.
Fund flows, charted#
Methodology#
Returns are total returns (dividends reinvested) from daily adjusted closes. Holdings, overlap, sector weights and flows derive from each fund's public SEC filings (Form N-PORT), anchored on the latest filing and rolled forward daily by price moves. Overlap is the sum of the smaller weight across shared holdings. See each fund's full holdings: FNCMX holdings · ONEQ holdings. Past performance does not predict future returns; not investment advice.
FAQ#
- FNCMX or ONEQ — which is better?
- ONEQ is the cheaper fund (0.21% vs 0.29% expense ratio). Over the last five years ONEQ returned more (+72.37% vs +71.04%, total return). Their portfolios overlap by about 98% of weight. FNCMX and ONEQ on the same index — a mutual fund priced once a day against an ETF traded all day: the fee, the tracking and the minimum.
- How much do FNCMX and ONEQ overlap?
- FNCMX and ONEQ overlap by about 98% of portfolio weight, sharing 1000 holdings (per each fund's latest SEC N-PORT filing, weights rolled forward to today).
- Is ChartRow affiliated with any of these funds?
- No. ChartRow is independent and not affiliated with, sponsored by, or endorsed by Fidelity. Comparisons are derived independently from public SEC filings and market data; not investment advice.