EBABX vs. MCFIX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EBABX (Eaton Vance Total Return Bond Fund Class A) and MCFIX (Mercer Core Fixed Income Fund) are both Intermediate Core-Plus Bond funds. Over the past 5 years, EBABX returned 1.17%/yr vs -0.03%/yr for MCFIX. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. EBABX charges 0.73%/yr vs 0.16%/yr for MCFIX.

Performance

EBABX vs. MCFIX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Eaton Vance Total Return Bond Fund Class A (EBABX) and Mercer Core Fixed Income Fund (MCFIX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EBABX achieves a 0.41% return, which is significantly higher than MCFIX's -1.10% return.

EBABX

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.59%
• YTD: 0.41%
• 6M: 0.49%
• 1Y: 6.18%
• 3Y*: 5.78%
• 5Y*: 1.17%
• 10Y*: 3.33%

MCFIX

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.11%
• YTD: -1.10%
• 6M: -1.02%
• 1Y: 3.23%
• 3Y*: 3.77%
• 5Y*: -0.03%
• 10Y*: —

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

EBABX vs. MCFIX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
EBABX Eaton Vance Total Return Bond Fund Class A	0.41%	8.87%	4.21%	5.30%	-13.08%	2.76%	5.62%	5.47%
MCFIX Mercer Core Fixed Income Fund	-1.10%	6.64%	2.02%	6.47%	-13.69%	-1.05%	4.75%	3.31%

Correlation

The correlation between EBABX and MCFIX is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.81
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.87
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 15, 2019	0.83

The correlation between EBABX and MCFIX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

EBABX vs. MCFIX — Risk / Return Rank

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

EBABX

EBABX Risk / Return Rank: 28
EBABX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
EBABX Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
EBABX Omega Ratio Rank: 29
EBABX Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
EBABX Martin Ratio Rank: 23

MCFIX

MCFIX Risk / Return Rank: 10
MCFIX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
MCFIX Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
MCFIX Omega Ratio Rank: 11
MCFIX Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
MCFIX Martin Ratio Rank: 9

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.

EBABX vs. MCFIX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Eaton Vance Total Return Bond Fund Class A (EBABX) and Mercer Core Fixed Income Fund (MCFIX). 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.

	EBABX	MCFIX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.57	0.89	+0.68
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.36	1.31	+1.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.16	+0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.90	0.98	+0.93
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.85	2.80	+3.04
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EBABX vs. MCFIX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EBABX Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is higher than the MCFIX Sharpe Ratio of 0.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EBABX and MCFIX, 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

	EBABX	MCFIX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.57	0.89	+0.68
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.22	-0.00	+0.23
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.71	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.77	0.14	+0.63

Drawdowns

EBABX vs. MCFIX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EBABX drawdown since its inception was -17.19%, smaller than the maximum MCFIX drawdown of -21.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EBABX and MCFIX.

Drawdown Indicators

	EBABX	MCFIX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.19%	-21.68%	+4.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.27%	-3.75%	+0.48%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-5.68%	-6.32%	+0.64%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.19%	-18.72%	+1.53%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-17.19%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.47%	-6.08%	+4.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.65%	-8.54%	+4.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.06%	1.27%	-0.21%

Volatility

EBABX vs. MCFIX - Volatility Comparison

Eaton Vance Total Return Bond Fund Class A (EBABX) has a higher volatility of 1.52% compared to Mercer Core Fixed Income Fund (MCFIX) at 1.32%. This indicates that EBABX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MCFIX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EBABX	MCFIX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.52%	1.32%	+0.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.96%	2.77%	+0.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.95%	4.12%	-0.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.31%	6.04%	-0.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.68%	6.12%	-1.44%

EBABX vs. MCFIX - Expense Ratio Comparison

EBABX has a 0.73% expense ratio, which is higher than MCFIX's 0.16% expense ratio.

Dividends

EBABX vs. MCFIX - Dividend Comparison

EBABX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.88%, more than MCFIX's 4.31% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EBABX Eaton Vance Total Return Bond Fund Class A	4.88%	4.89%	5.31%	3.83%	3.77%	3.23%	3.64%	3.71%	3.89%	3.29%	3.66%	5.41%
MCFIX Mercer Core Fixed Income Fund	4.31%	3.89%	4.54%	3.68%	3.31%	2.45%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EBABX and MCFIX in my portfolio?

EBABX and MCFIX have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EBABX or MCFIX?

EBABX has higher volatility (1.52%) compared to MCFIX (1.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EBABX dropped -17.19% vs MCFIX's -21.68%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EBABX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.57 vs 0.89), 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.