FBOT vs. XT

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

FBOT (Fidelity Disruptive Automation ETF) and XT (iShares Future Exponential Technologies ETF) are both Technology Equities funds. FBOT is actively managed, while XT is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FBOT returned 14.52%/yr vs 15.97%/yr for XT. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FBOT charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.46%/yr for XT.

Performance

FBOT vs. XT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Disruptive Automation ETF (FBOT) and iShares Future Exponential Technologies ETF (XT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBOT achieves a 14.09% return, which is significantly lower than XT's 17.55% return.

FBOT

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: -2.67%
• 6M: 7.58%
• YTD: 14.09%
• 1Y: 25.66%
• 3Y*: 14.52%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

XT

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: -0.80%
• 6M: 13.60%
• YTD: 17.55%
• 1Y: 34.87%
• 3Y*: 15.97%
• 5Y*: 7.67%
• 10Y*: 14.35%

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

FBOT vs. XT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FBOT Fidelity Disruptive Automation ETF	14.09%	19.15%	12.58%	-0.65%
XT iShares Future Exponential Technologies ETF	17.55%	26.28%	0.29%	10.46%

Correlation

The correlation between FBOT and XT is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.85
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 12, 2023	0.88

The correlation between FBOT and XT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

FBOT vs. XT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FBOT	XT
Industrials	52.4%	7.8%
Technology	37.5%	43.5%
Consumer Cyclical	4.3%	7.5%
Communication Services	3.0%	4.1%
Financial Services	1.7%	3.0%
Healthcare	0.8%	26.9%
Basic Materials	-	1.6%
Consumer Defensive	-	0.0%
Energy	-	0.5%
Real Estate	-	0.0%
Utilities	-	4.7%

Return for Risk

FBOT vs. XT — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBOT

FBOT Risk / Return Rank: 41
FBOT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
FBOT Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
FBOT Omega Ratio Rank: 39
FBOT Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
FBOT Martin Ratio Rank: 47

XT

XT Risk / Return Rank: 78
XT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
XT Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
XT Omega Ratio Rank: 74
XT Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
XT Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

FBOT vs. XT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Disruptive Automation ETF (FBOT) and iShares Future Exponential Technologies ETF (XT). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	FBOT	XT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.18	2.00	-0.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.68	2.69	-1.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.35	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.70	3.35	-1.65
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.33	12.96	-6.62

FBOT vs. XT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBOT Sharpe Ratio is 1.18, which is lower than the XT Sharpe Ratio of 2.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBOT and XT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FBOT vs. XT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBOT drawdown since its inception was -23.61%, smaller than the maximum XT drawdown of -34.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBOT and XT.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBOT	XT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.61%	-34.41%	+10.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.17%	-10.45%	-4.72%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.61%	-22.09%	-1.52%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-34.41%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-34.41%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.36%	-2.67%	-2.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.10%	-7.36%	+2.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.06%	2.70%	+1.36%

Volatility

FBOT vs. XT - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Disruptive Automation ETF (FBOT) has a higher volatility of 7.55% compared to iShares Future Exponential Technologies ETF (XT) at 5.92%. This indicates that FBOT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBOT	XT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.55%	5.92%	+1.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.02%	14.11%	+3.91%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.85%	17.48%	+4.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.28%	21.05%	+0.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.28%	20.09%	+1.19%

FBOT vs. XT - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBOT has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than XT's 0.46% expense ratio.

Dividends

FBOT vs. XT - Dividend Comparison

FBOT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.44%, less than XT's 6.97% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FBOT Fidelity Disruptive Automation ETF	0.44%	0.81%	0.31%	0.20%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XT iShares Future Exponential Technologies ETF	6.97%	7.95%	0.66%	0.41%	0.78%	0.84%	0.77%	1.55%	1.40%	0.97%	1.37%	1.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBOT and XT in my portfolio?

FBOT and XT have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FBOT or XT?

FBOT has higher volatility (7.55%) compared to XT (5.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBOT dropped -23.61% vs XT's -34.41%.

Which ETF is better, FBOT or XT?

On 3-year performance, XT leads with 15.97% vs 14.52% for FBOT. On fees, XT is cheaper at 0.46% per year. On volatility, XT has been the lower-risk option at 5.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FBOT or XT?

Over the 3-year period, XT has performed better with a 15.97% return vs 14.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBOT or XT?

XT is cheaper with a 0.46% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FBOT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FBOT or XT?

XT has the higher dividend yield at 6.97%, compared with 0.44% for FBOT.

What is the main difference between FBOT and XT?

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FBOT and 0.46% for XT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.00 vs 1.18), 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.