PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FBND vs. GRPM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FBND vs. GRPM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) and Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF (GRPM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBND achieves a 0.10% return, which is significantly lower than GRPM's 7.01% return. Over the past 10 years, FBND has underperformed GRPM with an annualized return of 2.47%, while GRPM has yielded a comparatively higher 10.98% annualized 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%

GRPM

1D
0.52%
1M
1.82%
YTD
7.01%
6M
6.96%
1Y
21.75%
3Y*
14.21%
5Y*
7.56%
10Y*
10.98%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FBND vs. GRPM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FBND
Fidelity Total Bond ETF
0.10%7.57%2.13%6.81%-12.54%-0.43%9.41%9.82%-0.57%3.52%
GRPM
Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF
7.01%7.81%15.67%18.79%-11.63%26.35%15.60%23.05%-12.45%13.05%

Correlation

The correlation between FBND and GRPM is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.25

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.21

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.20

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.07

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 9, 2014

0.06

The correlation between FBND and GRPM shifts across timeframes, from 0.06 (all time) to 0.25 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FBND vs. GRPM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FBND
GRPM

Industrials

71.4%
9.4%

Utilities

27.5%

-

Energy

1.1%
15.0%

Financial Services

0.2%
30.6%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

11.4%

Consumer Defensive

-

6.5%

Healthcare

-

11.4%

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

15.8%

Industrials

FBND
71.4%
GRPM
9.4%

Utilities

FBND
27.5%
GRPM

-

Energy

FBND
1.1%
GRPM
15.0%

Financial Services

FBND
0.2%
GRPM
30.6%

Basic Materials

FBND

-

GRPM

-

Communication Services

FBND

-

GRPM

-

Consumer Cyclical

FBND

-

GRPM
11.4%

Consumer Defensive

FBND

-

GRPM
6.5%

Healthcare

FBND

-

GRPM
11.4%

Real Estate

FBND

-

GRPM

-

Technology

FBND

-

GRPM
15.8%

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

FBND vs. GRPM — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBND
FBND Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
FBND Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBND Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBND Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
FBND Calmar Ratio Rank: 4545
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBND Martin Ratio Rank: 4040
Martin Ratio Rank

GRPM
GRPM Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
GRPM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GRPM Sortino Ratio Rank: 4545
Sortino Ratio Rank
GRPM Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
GRPM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
GRPM Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
Martin Ratio Rank
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. GRPM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) and Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF (GRPM). 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.


FBNDGRPMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.05

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.08

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.24

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.01

2.87

-0.86

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.97

8.47

-2.50

FBND vs. GRPM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBND Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is comparable to the GRPM Sharpe Ratio of 1.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBND and GRPM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FBNDGRPMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.41

1.36

+0.05

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.12

0.36

-0.25

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.41

0.50

-0.09

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.44

0.54

-0.11

Drawdowns

FBND vs. GRPM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBND drawdown since its inception was -17.25%, smaller than the maximum GRPM drawdown of -43.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBND and GRPM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FBNDGRPMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-17.25%

-43.12%

+25.87%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.66%

-7.62%

+4.96%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.94%

-28.09%

+22.15%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.25%

-28.09%

+10.84%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-17.25%

-43.12%

+25.87%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.82%

-1.17%

-0.65%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.35%

-5.71%

+2.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.90%

2.57%

-1.67%

Volatility

FBND vs. GRPM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) is 1.23%, while Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF (GRPM) has a volatility of 3.79%. This indicates that FBND experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GRPM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FBNDGRPMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.23%

3.79%

-2.56%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.75%

10.52%

-7.77%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.80%

16.10%

-12.30%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.92%

20.91%

-14.99%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.10%

22.26%

-16.16%

FBND vs. GRPM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBND has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is higher than GRPM's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

FBND vs. GRPM - Dividend Comparison

FBND's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.72%, more than GRPM's 0.96% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
GRPM
Invesco S&P MidCap 400® GARP ETF
0.96%1.19%0.95%0.96%1.28%0.92%1.16%1.25%1.50%1.14%1.00%1.43%

Frequently Asked Questions


FBND and GRPM have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GRPM has higher volatility (3.79%) compared to FBND (1.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBND dropped -17.25% vs GRPM's -43.12%.

On 10-year performance, GRPM leads with 10.98% vs 2.47% for FBND. On fees, GRPM is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, FBND has been the lower-risk option at 1.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, GRPM has performed better with a 10.98% return vs 2.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GRPM is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for FBND.

FBND has the higher dividend yield at 4.72%, compared with 0.96% for GRPM.

FBND is categorized as Intermediate Core-Plus Bond, while GRPM is Mid Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for FBND and 0.35% for GRPM.

FBND currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.41 vs 1.36), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FBND and GRPM

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