DCIBX vs. FCTFX

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

DCIBX (DFA California Intermediate-Term Municipal Bond Portfolio) and FCTFX (Fidelity California Municipal Income Fund) are both Municipal Bonds funds. Over the past 10 years, DCIBX returned 1.35%/yr vs 2.13%/yr for FCTFX. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DCIBX charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for FCTFX.

Performance

DCIBX vs. FCTFX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in DFA California Intermediate-Term Municipal Bond Portfolio (DCIBX) and Fidelity California Municipal Income Fund (FCTFX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DCIBX achieves a 0.83% return, which is significantly lower than FCTFX's 1.09% return. Over the past 10 years, DCIBX has underperformed FCTFX with an annualized return of 1.35%, while FCTFX has yielded a comparatively higher 2.13% annualized return.

DCIBX

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.22%
• YTD: 0.83%
• 6M: 1.25%
• 1Y: 4.95%
• 3Y*: 3.04%
• 5Y*: 1.07%
• 10Y*: 1.35%

FCTFX

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.43%
• YTD: 1.09%
• 6M: 1.45%
• 1Y: 7.37%
• 3Y*: 4.37%
• 5Y*: 1.12%
• 10Y*: 2.13%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

DCIBX vs. FCTFX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
DCIBX DFA California Intermediate-Term Municipal Bond Portfolio	0.83%	3.70%	1.19%	3.73%	-3.75%	-0.53%	2.78%	4.09%	1.36%	2.30%
FCTFX Fidelity California Municipal Income Fund	1.09%	5.75%	1.89%	6.53%	-9.64%	1.39%	4.50%	7.63%	0.68%	5.81%

Correlation

The correlation between DCIBX and FCTFX is 0.75, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.75
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.79
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.80
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 6, 2012	0.73

The correlation between DCIBX and FCTFX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

DCIBX vs. FCTFX — Risk / Return Rank

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

DCIBX

DCIBX Risk / Return Rank: 73
DCIBX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
DCIBX Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
DCIBX Omega Ratio Rank: 96
DCIBX Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
DCIBX Martin Ratio Rank: 39

FCTFX

FCTFX Risk / Return Rank: 61
FCTFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
FCTFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
FCTFX Omega Ratio Rank: 88
FCTFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
FCTFX Martin Ratio Rank: 30

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.

DCIBX vs. FCTFX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for DFA California Intermediate-Term Municipal Bond Portfolio (DCIBX) and Fidelity California Municipal Income Fund (FCTFX). 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.

	DCIBX	FCTFX	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.01	2.52	+0.48
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.70	3.85	+0.85
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.86	1.62	+0.24
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.70	2.16	+0.55
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.45	7.23	+1.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DCIBX vs. FCTFX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DCIBX Sharpe Ratio is 3.01, which is comparable to the FCTFX Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DCIBX and FCTFX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	DCIBX	FCTFX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.01	2.52	+0.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.49	0.28	+0.21
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.58	0.53	+0.05
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.75	1.13	-0.38

Drawdowns

DCIBX vs. FCTFX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DCIBX drawdown since its inception was -7.97%, smaller than the maximum FCTFX drawdown of -23.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DCIBX and FCTFX.

Drawdown Indicators

	DCIBX	FCTFX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.97%	-23.20%	+15.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.80%	-3.42%	+1.62%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-2.97%	-5.39%	+2.42%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-7.22%	-14.01%	+6.79%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-7.97%	-14.01%	+6.04%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.82%	-1.14%	+0.32%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.29%	-2.43%	+1.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.57%	1.02%	-0.45%

Volatility

DCIBX vs. FCTFX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for DFA California Intermediate-Term Municipal Bond Portfolio (DCIBX) is 0.51%, while Fidelity California Municipal Income Fund (FCTFX) has a volatility of 1.15%. This indicates that DCIBX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FCTFX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DCIBX	FCTFX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.51%	1.15%	-0.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.24%	2.23%	-0.99%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.63%	2.87%	-1.24%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.19%	3.97%	-1.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.36%	4.06%	-1.70%

DCIBX vs. FCTFX - Expense Ratio Comparison

DCIBX has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than FCTFX's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

DCIBX vs. FCTFX - Dividend Comparison

DCIBX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.59%, less than FCTFX's 3.03% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
DCIBX DFA California Intermediate-Term Municipal Bond Portfolio	2.59%	2.44%	2.06%	1.69%	1.15%	1.05%	1.34%	1.46%	1.44%	1.32%	1.44%	1.61%
FCTFX Fidelity California Municipal Income Fund	3.03%	3.86%	2.85%	2.67%	1.67%	2.28%	2.79%	2.84%	3.01%	3.53%	3.52%	3.03%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DCIBX and FCTFX in my portfolio?

DCIBX and FCTFX have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DCIBX or FCTFX?

FCTFX has higher volatility (1.15%) compared to DCIBX (0.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DCIBX dropped -7.97% vs FCTFX's -23.20%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DCIBX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.01 vs 2.52), 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.