PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CIF vs. FQTIX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CIF vs. FQTIX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MFS Intermediate High Income Fund (CIF) and Franklin Templeton SMACS: Series I (FQTIX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CIF achieves a -0.48% return, which is significantly lower than FQTIX's 3.55% return.


CIF

1D
0.00%
1M
0.63%
YTD
-0.48%
6M
-1.95%
1Y
5.11%
3Y*
10.45%
5Y*
-2.53%
10Y*
5.56%

FQTIX

1D
0.12%
1M
0.74%
YTD
3.55%
6M
4.18%
1Y
9.55%
3Y*
8.69%
5Y*
3.80%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CIF vs. FQTIX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022202120202019
CIF
MFS Intermediate High Income Fund
-0.48%8.97%11.42%11.85%-32.24%17.80%0.27%16.84%
FQTIX
Franklin Templeton SMACS: Series I
3.55%7.51%8.03%13.44%-14.39%8.51%3.68%4.11%

Correlation

The correlation between CIF and FQTIX is 0.34, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.34

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.40

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.44

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2019

0.38

The correlation between CIF and FQTIX shifts across timeframes, from 0.34 (1 year) to 0.44 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

CIF vs. FQTIX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CIF
CIF Risk / Return Rank: 77
Overall Rank
CIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
Sortino Ratio Rank
CIF Omega Ratio Rank: 66
Omega Ratio Rank
CIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
Calmar Ratio Rank
CIF Martin Ratio Rank: 77
Martin Ratio Rank

FQTIX
FQTIX Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
FQTIX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FQTIX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
FQTIX Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
FQTIX Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
FQTIX Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

CIF vs. FQTIX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MFS Intermediate High Income Fund (CIF) and Franklin Templeton SMACS: Series I (FQTIX). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


CIFFQTIXDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.50

3.16

-2.66

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

0.81

4.79

-3.97

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.10

1.72

-0.62

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.65

4.44

-3.79

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

1.84

23.37

-21.52

CIF vs. FQTIX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CIF Sharpe Ratio is 0.50, which is lower than the FQTIX Sharpe Ratio of 3.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CIF and FQTIX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CIFFQTIXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.50

3.16

-2.66

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.15

0.64

-0.80

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.29

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.16

0.60

-0.44

Drawdowns

CIF vs. FQTIX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CIF drawdown since its inception was -69.23%, which is greater than FQTIX's maximum drawdown of -24.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIF and FQTIX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CIFFQTIXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-69.23%

-24.62%

-44.61%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.89%

-2.20%

-5.69%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.73%

-6.42%

-4.31%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-44.92%

-18.81%

-26.11%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-45.24%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-21.94%

0.00%

-21.94%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-17.82%

-4.32%

-13.50%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.78%

0.42%

+2.36%

Volatility

CIF vs. FQTIX - Volatility Comparison

MFS Intermediate High Income Fund (CIF) has a higher volatility of 2.58% compared to Franklin Templeton SMACS: Series I (FQTIX) at 0.81%. This indicates that CIF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FQTIX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CIFFQTIXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.58%

0.81%

+1.77%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.61%

2.37%

+5.24%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.21%

3.09%

+7.12%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.42%

5.94%

+10.48%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.45%

7.72%

+11.73%

CIF vs. FQTIX - Expense Ratio Comparison

CIF has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FQTIX's 0.00% expense ratio.


Dividends

CIF vs. FQTIX - Dividend Comparison

CIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.95%, more than FQTIX's 6.84% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CIF
MFS Intermediate High Income Fund
10.95%10.46%10.23%10.02%11.22%8.40%9.01%8.63%11.71%9.16%9.91%10.05%
FQTIX
Franklin Templeton SMACS: Series I
6.84%5.70%7.86%7.64%8.10%7.15%6.89%5.63%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


CIF and FQTIX have a correlation of 0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CIF has higher volatility (2.58%) compared to FQTIX (0.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CIF dropped -69.23% vs FQTIX's -24.62%.

FQTIX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.16 vs 0.50), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CIF and FQTIX

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer