FBND vs. CLOZ

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

FBND (Fidelity Total Bond ETF) and CLOZ (Panagram BBB-B CLO ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FBND is a Intermediate Core-Plus Bond fund actively managed by Fidelity, while CLOZ is a CLO fund actively managed by Panagram. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FBND returned 4.60%/yr vs 10.45%/yr for CLOZ. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FBND charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for CLOZ.

Performance

FBND vs. CLOZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) and Panagram BBB-B CLO ETF (CLOZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBND achieves a 0.10% return, which is significantly lower than CLOZ's 2.44% return.

FBND

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: -0.69%
• YTD: 0.10%
• 6M: 0.40%
• 1Y: 5.34%
• 3Y*: 4.60%
• 5Y*: 0.68%
• 10Y*: 2.47%

CLOZ

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 0.39%
• YTD: 2.44%
• 6M: 2.91%
• 1Y: 6.07%
• 3Y*: 10.45%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FBND vs. CLOZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FBND Fidelity Total Bond ETF	0.10%	7.57%	2.13%	3.35%
CLOZ Panagram BBB-B CLO ETF	2.44%	5.99%	11.85%	14.92%

Correlation

The correlation between FBND and CLOZ is 0.08, 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	0.08
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.00
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2023	0.01

Return for Risk

FBND vs. CLOZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBND

FBND Risk / Return Rank: 44
FBND Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
FBND Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
FBND Omega Ratio Rank: 41
FBND Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
FBND Martin Ratio Rank: 40

CLOZ

CLOZ Risk / Return Rank: 53
CLOZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
CLOZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
CLOZ Omega Ratio Rank: 83
CLOZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
CLOZ Martin Ratio Rank: 36

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.

FBND vs. CLOZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) and Panagram BBB-B CLO ETF (CLOZ). 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.

	FBND	CLOZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.41	1.77	-0.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.09	2.26	-0.17
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.45	-0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.01	1.56	+0.45
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.97	5.19	+0.78
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FBND vs. CLOZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBND Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is comparable to the CLOZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBND and CLOZ, 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

	FBND	CLOZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.41	1.77	-0.36
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.12	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.41	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.44	2.75	-2.31

Drawdowns

FBND vs. CLOZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBND drawdown since its inception was -17.25%, which is greater than CLOZ's maximum drawdown of -5.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBND and CLOZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBND	CLOZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.25%	-5.32%	-11.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.66%	-3.90%	+1.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-5.94%	-5.32%	-0.62%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.25%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-17.25%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.82%	-0.21%	-1.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.35%	-0.38%	-2.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.90%	1.17%	-0.27%

Volatility

FBND vs. CLOZ - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) has a higher volatility of 1.23% compared to Panagram BBB-B CLO ETF (CLOZ) at 0.47%. This indicates that FBND's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CLOZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBND	CLOZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.23%	0.47%	+0.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.75%	3.13%	-0.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.80%	3.44%	+0.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.92%	3.80%	+2.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.10%	3.80%	+2.30%

FBND vs. CLOZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBND has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is lower than CLOZ's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

FBND vs. CLOZ - Dividend Comparison

FBND's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.72%, less than CLOZ's 7.40% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CLOZ Panagram BBB-B CLO ETF	7.40%	7.63%	9.09%	8.81%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FBND Fidelity Total Bond ETF	4.72%	4.70%	4.73%	4.26%	3.07%	1.86%	4.25%	2.90%	2.93%	2.56%	2.84%	3.26%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBND and CLOZ in my portfolio?

FBND and CLOZ have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FBND or CLOZ?

FBND has higher volatility (1.23%) compared to CLOZ (0.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBND dropped -17.25% vs CLOZ's -5.32%.

Which ETF is better, FBND or CLOZ?

On 3-year performance, CLOZ leads with 10.45% vs 4.60% for FBND. On fees, FBND is cheaper at 0.36% per year. On volatility, CLOZ has been the lower-risk option at 0.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FBND or CLOZ?

Over the 3-year period, CLOZ has performed better with a 10.45% return vs 4.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBND or CLOZ?

FBND is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for CLOZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FBND or CLOZ?

CLOZ has the higher dividend yield at 7.40%, compared with 4.72% for FBND.

What is the main difference between FBND and CLOZ?

FBND is categorized as Intermediate Core-Plus Bond, while CLOZ is CLO. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Panagram. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for FBND and 0.50% for CLOZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CLOZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs 1.41), 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.