EQT vs. FLTR
EQT (EQT Corporation) is a stock, while FLTR (VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF) is Corporate Bonds fund tracking the MVIS US Investment Grade Floating Rate Index. Over the past 10 years, EQT returned 3.10%/yr vs 3.48%/yr for FLTR. At a 0.06 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
EQT vs. FLTR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EQT achieves a -2.74% return, which is significantly lower than FLTR's 2.11% return. Over the past 10 years, EQT has underperformed FLTR with an annualized return of 3.10%, while FLTR has yielded a comparatively higher 3.48% annualized return.
EQT
- 1D
- 2.21%
- 1M
- -10.50%
- YTD
- -2.74%
- 6M
- -2.56%
- 1Y
- -13.22%
- 3Y*
- 11.35%
- 5Y*
- 21.84%
- 10Y*
- 3.10%
FLTR
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 0.30%
- YTD
- 2.11%
- 6M
- 2.32%
- 1Y
- 5.21%
- 3Y*
- 6.13%
- 5Y*
- 4.52%
- 10Y*
- 3.48%
EQT vs. FLTR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EQT EQT Corporation | -2.74% | 17.64% | 21.41% | 16.20% | 57.64% | 71.60% | 17.27% | -41.82% | -38.82% | -12.80% |
FLTR VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF | 2.11% | 5.22% | 7.38% | 7.41% | 0.74% | 0.55% | 1.44% | 5.70% | 0.30% | 2.80% |
Correlation
The correlation between EQT and FLTR is -0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.02 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.06 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.08 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.07 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 26, 2011 | 0.06 |
The correlation between EQT and FLTR shifts across timeframes, from -0.02 (1 year) to 0.08 (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
EQT vs. FLTR — Risk / Return Rank
EQT
FLTR
EQT vs. FLTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for EQT Corporation (EQT) and VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF (FLTR). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| EQT | FLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -6.93 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -12.46 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.95 | 3.02 | -2.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.53 | 16.69 | -17.22 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.11 | 97.81 | -98.92 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EQT vs. FLTR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EQT drawdown since its inception was -91.51%, which is greater than FLTR's maximum drawdown of -17.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EQT and FLTR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EQT | FLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -91.51% | -17.84% | -73.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -25.12% | -0.31% | -24.81% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -31.62% | -1.93% | -29.69% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -42.56% | -3.06% | -39.50% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -88.28% | -17.84% | -70.44% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -23.47% | -0.08% | -23.39% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -23.34% | -0.67% | -22.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.98% | 0.05% | +11.93% |
Volatility
EQT vs. FLTR - Volatility Comparison
EQT Corporation (EQT) has a higher volatility of 6.72% compared to VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF (FLTR) at 0.29%. This indicates that EQT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EQT | FLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.72% | 0.29% | +6.43% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.90% | 0.65% | +20.25% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 32.43% | 0.80% | +31.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 42.63% | 2.13% | +40.50% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 48.94% | 5.00% | +43.94% |
Dividends
EQT vs. FLTR - Dividend Comparison
EQT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.26%, less than FLTR's 4.72% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EQT EQT Corporation | 1.26% | 1.19% | 1.37% | 1.57% | 1.63% | 0.00% | 0.24% | 1.10% | 0.42% | 0.21% | 0.18% | 0.23% |
FLTR VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF | 4.72% | 4.97% | 5.93% | 6.07% | 2.29% | 0.63% | 1.49% | 3.05% | 2.67% | 1.69% | 1.16% | 0.71% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EQT and FLTR have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EQT has higher volatility (6.72%) compared to FLTR (0.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EQT dropped -91.51% vs FLTR's -17.84%.
FLTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.52 vs -0.41), 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.
Find the right allocation for EQT and FLTR
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