FBAL.NEO vs. GRO.TO
FBAL.NEO (Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF) and GRO.TO (Franklin Growth ETF Portfolio) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FBAL.NEO returned 16.77% vs 24.84% for GRO.TO. At a 0.09 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FBAL.NEO charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.21%/yr for GRO.TO.
Performance
FBAL.NEO vs. GRO.TO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FBAL.NEO achieves a 7.17% return, which is significantly lower than GRO.TO's 9.91% return.
FBAL.NEO
- 1D
- 0.26%
- 1M
- 2.98%
- YTD
- 7.17%
- 6M
- 6.81%
- 1Y
- 16.77%
- 3Y*
- 16.34%
- 5Y*
- 10.81%
- 10Y*
- —
GRO.TO
- 1D
- 1.05%
- 1M
- 5.59%
- YTD
- 9.91%
- 6M
- 12.55%
- 1Y
- 24.84%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FBAL.NEO vs. GRO.TO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
FBAL.NEO Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF | 7.17% | 12.92% | 8.91% |
GRO.TO Franklin Growth ETF Portfolio | 9.91% | 11.09% | 15.17% |
Correlation
The correlation between FBAL.NEO and GRO.TO is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.12 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 6, 2024 | 0.09 |
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
FBAL.NEO vs. GRO.TO — Risk / Return Rank
FBAL.NEO
GRO.TO
FBAL.NEO vs. GRO.TO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF (FBAL.NEO) and Franklin Growth ETF Portfolio (GRO.TO). 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.
| FBAL.NEO | GRO.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.91 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.74 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | 3.66 | -2.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.79 | 4.30 | -1.51 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.65 | 20.48 | -8.83 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FBAL.NEO | GRO.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.23 | 3.14 | -0.91 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.27 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.23 | 1.58 | -0.35 |
Drawdowns
FBAL.NEO vs. GRO.TO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FBAL.NEO drawdown since its inception was -13.83%, which is greater than GRO.TO's maximum drawdown of -12.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBAL.NEO and GRO.TO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FBAL.NEO | GRO.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.83% | -12.96% | -0.87% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.04% | -5.81% | -0.23% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -8.29% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -13.83% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.19% | 0.00% | -0.19% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.43% | -1.25% | -1.18% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.44% | 1.22% | +0.22% |
Volatility
FBAL.NEO vs. GRO.TO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF (FBAL.NEO) is 2.78%, while Franklin Growth ETF Portfolio (GRO.TO) has a volatility of 3.42%. This indicates that FBAL.NEO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GRO.TO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FBAL.NEO | GRO.TO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.78% | 3.42% | -0.64% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.08% | 6.68% | -0.60% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.54% | 7.94% | -0.40% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.58% | 11.89% | -3.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.57% | 11.89% | -3.32% |
FBAL.NEO vs. GRO.TO - Expense Ratio Comparison
FBAL.NEO has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than GRO.TO's 0.21% expense ratio.
Dividends
FBAL.NEO vs. GRO.TO - Dividend Comparison
FBAL.NEO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.50%, less than GRO.TO's 2.11% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FBAL.NEO Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF | 1.50% | 1.61% | 1.42% | 1.71% | 4.48% | 1.08% |
GRO.TO Franklin Growth ETF Portfolio | 2.11% | 2.04% | 1.50% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FBAL.NEO and GRO.TO have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GRO.TO is cheaper at 0.21% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GRO.TO is cheaper with a 0.21% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for FBAL.NEO.
They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for FBAL.NEO and 0.21% for GRO.TO.
Find the right allocation for FBAL.NEO and GRO.TO
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