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

Performance

FBND vs. ONEQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) and Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF (ONEQ). 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 0.50% return, which is significantly lower than ONEQ's 16.16% return. Over the past 10 years, FBND has underperformed ONEQ with an annualized return of 2.56%, while ONEQ has yielded a comparatively higher 19.68% annualized return.


FBND

1D
-0.20%
1M
0.31%
YTD
0.50%
6M
0.30%
1Y
5.59%
3Y*
4.70%
5Y*
0.83%
10Y*
2.56%

ONEQ

1D
-0.85%
1M
7.21%
YTD
16.16%
6M
15.18%
1Y
39.62%
3Y*
27.68%
5Y*
15.43%
10Y*
19.68%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FBND vs. ONEQ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FBND
Fidelity Total Bond ETF
0.50%7.57%2.13%6.81%-12.54%-0.43%9.41%9.82%-0.57%3.52%
ONEQ
Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF
16.16%20.89%29.30%45.73%-32.12%22.11%44.87%38.01%-3.18%29.29%

Correlation

The correlation between FBND and ONEQ is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.23

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

0.20

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

0.22

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

0.14

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 10, 2014

0.12

The correlation between FBND and ONEQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.12 (all time) to 0.23 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FBND vs. ONEQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FBND
ONEQ

Industrials

71.4%
2.9%

Utilities

27.5%
0.9%

Energy

1.1%
0.6%

Financial Services

0.2%
3.1%

Basic Materials

-

1.0%

Communication Services

-

16.7%

Consumer Cyclical

-

13.3%

Consumer Defensive

-

5.2%

Healthcare

-

5.1%

Real Estate

-

0.6%

Technology

-

50.8%

Industrials

FBND
71.4%
ONEQ
2.9%

Utilities

FBND
27.5%
ONEQ
0.9%

Energy

FBND
1.1%
ONEQ
0.6%

Financial Services

FBND
0.2%
ONEQ
3.1%

Basic Materials

FBND

-

ONEQ
1.0%

Communication Services

FBND

-

ONEQ
16.7%

Consumer Cyclical

FBND

-

ONEQ
13.3%

Consumer Defensive

FBND

-

ONEQ
5.2%

Healthcare

FBND

-

ONEQ
5.1%

Real Estate

FBND

-

ONEQ
0.6%

Technology

FBND

-

ONEQ
50.8%

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. ONEQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBND
FBND Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
FBND Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBND Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBND Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
FBND Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBND Martin Ratio Rank: 3939
Martin Ratio Rank

ONEQ
ONEQ Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
ONEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ONEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
ONEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
ONEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
ONEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
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. ONEQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) and Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF (ONEQ). 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.


FBNDONEQDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.43

-0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.11

3.15

-1.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.37

12.46

-6.09

FBND vs. ONEQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBND Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is lower than the ONEQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBND and ONEQ, 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


FBNDONEQDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.46

2.48

-1.03

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.14

0.70

-0.56

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.42

0.91

-0.49

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.44

0.65

-0.21

Drawdowns

FBND vs. ONEQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBND drawdown since its inception was -17.25%, smaller than the maximum ONEQ drawdown of -55.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBND and ONEQ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FBNDONEQDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-17.25%

-55.09%

+37.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.66%

-12.64%

+9.98%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.94%

-24.09%

+18.15%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.25%

-35.23%

+17.98%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-17.25%

-35.23%

+17.98%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.43%

-0.85%

-0.58%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.35%

-7.95%

+4.60%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.88%

3.19%

-2.31%

Volatility

FBND vs. ONEQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) is 1.27%, while Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF (ONEQ) has a volatility of 4.20%. This indicates that FBND experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ONEQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FBNDONEQDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.27%

4.20%

-2.93%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.73%

11.96%

-9.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.86%

16.05%

-12.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.92%

22.14%

-16.22%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.10%

21.71%

-15.61%

FBND vs. ONEQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBND has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is higher than ONEQ's 0.21% expense ratio.


Dividends

FBND vs. ONEQ - Dividend Comparison

FBND's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.70%, more than ONEQ's 0.67% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FBND
Fidelity Total Bond ETF
4.70%4.70%4.73%4.26%3.07%1.86%4.25%2.90%2.93%2.56%2.84%3.26%
ONEQ
Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF
0.67%0.54%0.65%0.71%0.97%0.54%0.71%2.51%1.08%0.84%1.12%1.04%

Frequently Asked Questions


FBND and ONEQ have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ONEQ has higher volatility (4.20%) compared to FBND (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBND dropped -17.25% vs ONEQ's -55.09%.

On 10-year performance, ONEQ leads with 19.68% vs 2.56% for FBND. On fees, ONEQ is cheaper at 0.21% per year. On volatility, FBND has been the lower-risk option at 1.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ONEQ has performed better with a 19.68% return vs 2.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ONEQ is cheaper with a 0.21% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for FBND.

FBND has the higher dividend yield at 4.70%, compared with 0.67% for ONEQ.

FBND is categorized as Intermediate Core-Plus Bond, while ONEQ is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for FBND and 0.21% for ONEQ.

ONEQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.48 vs 1.46), 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 ONEQ

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