What is the primary difference between the expense ratios of FSTA and IYK?

The Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples ETF (FSTA) has a lower expense ratio of 0.08%, while the iShares US Consumer Staples ETF (IYK) has a higher one at 0.37%. This results in a 0.29 percentage point difference. A lower expense ratio means the fund deducts less from its total assets to cover operating costs, which can lead to higher net returns for investors over time. This factor is often critical in evaluating long-term fund efficiency.

How do expense ratios impact my overall investment?

An expense ratio represents the annual cost of owning a fund, deducted directly from its total assets. For example, a 0.37% expense ratio on IYK is significantly higher than FSTA’s 0.08%. Over a multi-year period, this difference can meaningfully alter investment outcomes. By choosing an ETF with a lower expense ratio, like FSTA, you may retain more of your investment, thereby improving long-term results through cost efficiency.

What does it mean that the index tracked for FSTA and IYK is 'not available'?

When index tracking details are marked as 'not available', it indicates that the specific benchmarks these funds aim to replicate are not publicly disclosed in the source data. Without clear index information, it is difficult to compare how closely each fund follows its intended market segment. Investors often rely on these methodologies to assess tracking accuracy and potential deviation from their investment goals.

How do the dividend yields of FSTA and IYK compare?

FSTA offers a dividend yield of 2.27%, whereas IYK provides a slightly higher yield at 2.62%. In the ETF market, a higher yield suggests potentially more income from distributions, but it is essential to consider that yield alone does not determine total return. Both funds distribute earnings from their holdings, but differences in corporate actions and distribution policies within each fund can affect the consistency and total amount of income received.

Which fund has a longer track record, and why does that matter?

IYK has a longer track record, having been established on June 12, 2000, while FSTA was launched on October 21, 2013. A longer existence provides more historical data for analysing how the fund performs across various market cycles. While FSTA is a relatively newer ETF, it has a substantial asset base of $1.4 billion, supporting adequate trading liquidity for investors.

How similar are the top holdings in FSTA and IYK?

The two funds have significant overlap in their top ten holdings, including major names such as PG, KO, PM, PEP, MO, MDLZ, and CL. These seven shared companies indicate that both FSTA and IYK provide similar exposure to the consumer staples sector. Investors comparing the two will notice that they primarily hold the same leading firms, with the weighting differences reflecting the specific allocation models used by each fund.

How does sector representation in FSTA compare with that of IYK?

IYK includes healthcare distribution companies such as CVS and MCK within its top ten holdings, which provides broader sector exposure. In contrast, FSTA’s top holdings exclude healthcare distributors, focusing strictly on traditional consumer staples companies like WMT and COST. This means investors in IYK have exposure to a wider segment of the consumer defensive market than those in FSTA.

What is the size comparison between these two ETFs?

FSTA has an asset base of $1.4 billion, supporting its trading liquidity. IYK also reports net assets of $1.4 billion. Because the two funds are identical in size, neither provides a size advantage over the other. This suggests that both have reached a similar level of capital, indicating that neither fund is significantly smaller than the other.

Do FSTA and IYK have similar category classifications?

Both FSTA and IYK are classified as Consumer Defensive ETFs. This category typically includes companies that provide essential goods, such as food, beverages, and household products. These funds focus on sectors that tend to demonstrate resilience during various economic conditions because their revenues are derived from goods that consumers require regardless of the broader market environment.

Why is it important to check if sector weights are 'not available'?

For both FSTA and IYK, sector weights are listed as 'not available'. This means investors cannot view the precise breakdown of how assets are allocated across specific sub-sectors like food, retail, or personal products. Knowing these weights is vital for assessing exactly how much of your money is invested in each specific part of the consumer staples market.

FSTA vs IYK

Two funds, one decision: we compare cost, performance and what each ETF actually holds in September 2026.

Compare Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples ETF (FSTA) and iShares US Consumer Staples ETF (IYK). Explore how each fund tracks its market, review fees, holdings, and dividends. FSTA has an expense ratio of 0.08% and IYK 0.37%. Educational content, not financial advice.

Compare Fidelity MSCI Consumer Staples ETF (FSTA) and iShares US Consumer Staples ETF (IYK). Explore how each fund tracks its market, review fees, holdings, and dividends. FSTA has an expense ratio of...

Fund Snapshot

Key Fund Metrics

FSTA

Metric

IYK

0.08%

Expense Ratio

0.37%

2.27%

Dividend Yield

2.62%

$1.41B

Net Assets

$1.41B

99

Holdings

57

Oct 21, 2013

Inception Date

Jun 12, 2000

–

Index Tracked

–

Consumer Defensive

Fund Category

Consumer Defensive

FSTA costs about $29.00 less per year for every $10,000 invested.

Shared Top Holdings

Holding	FSTA	IYK
PGThe Procter & Gamble Company	9.77%	13.38%
KOThe Coca-Cola Company	9.74%	13.44%
PMPhilip Morris International Inc.	4.69%	11.58%
PEPPepsiCo, Inc.	4.38%	7.10%
MOAltria Group, Inc.	3.88%	4.37%
MDLZMondelez International, Inc.	2.70%	3.24%
CLColgate-Palmolive Company	2.28%	3.02%

Discover More Comparisons

FSTA vs XLP

Compare FSTA and XLP consumer staples ETFs. We examine fees, holdings, dividends, tracking, and key differences to help you research both options.

FSTA vs VDC

Compare FSTA and VDC on fees, assets, dividends and holdings. FSTA yields 2.27%, VDC yields 2.15%. Examine expenses and fund history for research.

FSTA vs SCHD

Compare FSTA and SCHD ETFs. Review expense ratios, holdings, yields, and tracking methods to evaluate these consumer staples and dividend funds side by side.

Investment Analysis

FSTA

Pros

Fund A offers a notably lower expense ratio of 0.08 per cent than the competing fund.
Fund A holds a substantial asset base of $1.4 billion, supporting trading liquidity for investors.
Fund A maintains a dividend yield of 2.27 per cent, providing steady income distribution.

Considerations

Fund A lacks publicly available index tracking information, making methodology assessment difficult for investors.
Fund A has a shorter inception date of October 2013 compared to longer-standing competitors.
Fund A excludes healthcare distributors from top holdings, narrowing overall sector representation slightly.

IYK

Pros

Fund B has a longer track record, having been established in June 2000 for investors.
Fund B offers a higher dividend yield of 2.62 per cent compared to the alternative.
Fund B includes healthcare distribution companies within its top ten holdings for broader exposure.

Considerations

Fund B carries a significantly higher expense ratio of 0.37 per cent than Fund A.
Fund B provides no publicly available index tracking details for methodology transparency purposes.
Fund B has identical net assets of $1.4 billion, offering no size advantage over competitor.

Related Market Insights

When Government Shutdowns Strike: Why Consumer Staples Could Be Your Portfolio's Best Defence

Navigate government shutdown fears with consumer staples. Discover how essential goods companies like PepsiCo & P&G offer portfolio stability & defence during economic uncertainty. Invest with Nemo.