FBND vs. ILCG

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

FBND (Fidelity Total Bond ETF) and ILCG (iShares Morningstar Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FBND is a Intermediate Core-Plus Bond fund actively managed by Fidelity, while ILCG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross. FBND is actively managed, while ILCG is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FBND returned 2.47%/yr vs 17.83%/yr for ILCG. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FBND charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for ILCG.

Performance

FBND vs. ILCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG). 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 ILCG's 10.48% return. Over the past 10 years, FBND has underperformed ILCG with an annualized return of 2.47%, while ILCG has yielded a comparatively higher 17.83% 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%

ILCG

• 1D: 0.76%
• 1M: 0.01%
• YTD: 10.48%
• 6M: 9.79%
• 1Y: 24.11%
• 3Y*: 25.09%
• 5Y*: 14.03%
• 10Y*: 17.83%

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

FBND vs. ILCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
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%
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF	10.48%	16.71%	32.82%	40.41%	-31.75%	24.33%	38.56%	33.22%	2.06%	30.57%

Correlation

The correlation between FBND and ILCG is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.24
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.20
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.23
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 10, 2014	0.13

The correlation between FBND and ILCG shifts across timeframes, from 0.13 (all time) to 0.24 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FBND vs. ILCG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FBND	ILCG
Industrials	71.4%	8.3%
Utilities	27.5%	0.8%
Energy	1.1%	0.5%
Financial Services	0.2%	6.0%
Basic Materials	-	1.1%
Communication Services	-	14.5%
Consumer Cyclical	-	10.6%
Consumer Defensive	-	1.6%
Healthcare	-	5.3%
Real Estate	-	1.4%
Technology	-	49.8%

Return for Risk

FBND vs. ILCG — 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

ILCG

ILCG Risk / Return Rank: 41
ILCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
ILCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
ILCG Omega Ratio Rank: 45
ILCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
ILCG Martin Ratio Rank: 38

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. ILCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) and iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG). 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	ILCG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.41	1.44	-0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.09	1.94	+0.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.26	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.01	1.55	+0.46
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.97	5.43	+0.54
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. ILCG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBND Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is comparable to the ILCG Sharpe Ratio of 1.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBND and ILCG, 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	ILCG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.41	1.44	-0.03
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.12	0.64	-0.52
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.41	0.83	-0.42
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.44	0.58	-0.14

Drawdowns

FBND vs. ILCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBND drawdown since its inception was -17.25%, smaller than the maximum ILCG drawdown of -52.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBND and ILCG.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBND	ILCG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.25%	-52.98%	+35.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.66%	-15.65%	+12.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-5.94%	-23.10%	+17.16%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.25%	-35.38%	+18.13%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-17.25%	-35.38%	+18.13%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.82%	-4.48%	+2.66%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.35%	-8.22%	+4.87%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.90%	4.45%	-3.55%

Volatility

FBND vs. ILCG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) is 1.23%, while iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) has a volatility of 6.01%. This indicates that FBND experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ILCG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBND	ILCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.23%	6.01%	-4.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.75%	13.55%	-10.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.80%	16.85%	-13.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.92%	22.08%	-16.16%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.10%	21.58%	-15.48%

FBND vs. ILCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBND has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is higher than ILCG's 0.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

FBND vs. ILCG - Dividend Comparison

FBND's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.72%, more than ILCG's 0.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
ILCG iShares Morningstar Growth ETF	0.42%	0.47%	0.50%	0.69%	0.75%	0.34%	0.28%	0.54%	0.81%	0.89%	0.95%	0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBND and ILCG in my portfolio?

FBND and ILCG have a correlation of 0.24, 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 ILCG?

ILCG has higher volatility (6.01%) compared to FBND (1.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBND dropped -17.25% vs ILCG's -52.98%.

Which ETF is better, FBND or ILCG?

On 10-year performance, ILCG leads with 17.83% vs 2.47% for FBND. On fees, ILCG is cheaper at 0.04% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, FBND or ILCG?

Over the 10-year period, ILCG has performed better with a 17.83% return vs 2.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBND or ILCG?

ILCG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for FBND.

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

FBND has the higher dividend yield at 4.72%, compared with 0.42% for ILCG.

What is the main difference between FBND and ILCG?

FBND is categorized as Intermediate Core-Plus Bond, while ILCG is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for FBND and 0.04% for ILCG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ILCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.44 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.