FDHY vs. IBHG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FDHY (Fidelity High Yield Factor ETF) and IBHG (iShares iBonds 2027 Term High Yield and Income ETF) are both High Yield Bonds funds. FDHY is actively managed, while IBHG is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FDHY returned 8.66%/yr vs 7.37%/yr for IBHG. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FDHY charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for IBHG.

Performance

FDHY vs. IBHG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity High Yield Factor ETF (FDHY) and iShares iBonds 2027 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FDHY achieves a 2.16% return, which is significantly higher than IBHG's 0.96% return.

FDHY

• 1D: -0.24%
• 1M: 0.53%
• YTD: 2.16%
• 6M: 2.73%
• 1Y: 8.50%
• 3Y*: 8.66%
• 5Y*: 3.99%
• 10Y*: —

IBHG

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 0.21%
• YTD: 0.96%
• 6M: 1.46%
• 1Y: 4.61%
• 3Y*: 7.37%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FDHY vs. IBHG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FDHY Fidelity High Yield Factor ETF	2.16%	9.24%	7.53%	11.14%	-11.30%	1.29%
IBHG iShares iBonds 2027 Term High Yield and Income ETF	0.96%	6.90%	7.42%	11.27%	-8.88%	1.07%

Correlation

The correlation between FDHY and IBHG is 0.62, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.62
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 12, 2021	0.79

The correlation between FDHY and IBHG shifts across timeframes, from 0.62 (1 year) to 0.79 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FDHY vs. IBHG — Risk / Return Rank

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

FDHY

FDHY Risk / Return Rank: 79
FDHY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
FDHY Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
FDHY Omega Ratio Rank: 80
FDHY Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
FDHY Martin Ratio Rank: 83

IBHG

IBHG Risk / Return Rank: 79
IBHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
IBHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
IBHG Omega Ratio Rank: 70
IBHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
IBHG Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

FDHY vs. IBHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity High Yield Factor ETF (FDHY) and iShares iBonds 2027 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHG). 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.

	FDHY	IBHG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.40	2.20	+0.20
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.68	3.42	+0.26
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.42	+0.07
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.02	6.38	-2.36
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	17.11	23.30	-6.18
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FDHY vs. IBHG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FDHY Sharpe Ratio is 2.40, which is comparable to the IBHG Sharpe Ratio of 2.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FDHY and IBHG, 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

	FDHY	IBHG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.40	2.20	+0.20
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.56	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.72	0.56	+0.15

Drawdowns

FDHY vs. IBHG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FDHY drawdown since its inception was -20.01%, which is greater than IBHG's maximum drawdown of -13.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDHY and IBHG.

Drawdown Indicators

	FDHY	IBHG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.01%	-13.85%	-6.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.12%	-0.73%	-1.39%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-5.26%	-3.39%	-1.87%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.38%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.24%	-0.22%	-0.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.88%	-2.67%	-0.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.50%	0.20%	+0.30%

Volatility

FDHY vs. IBHG - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity High Yield Factor ETF (FDHY) has a higher volatility of 1.23% compared to iShares iBonds 2027 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHG) at 0.58%. This indicates that FDHY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBHG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FDHY	IBHG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.23%	0.58%	+0.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.75%	1.53%	+1.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.57%	2.11%	+1.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.13%	6.37%	+0.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.05%	6.37%	+1.68%

FDHY vs. IBHG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FDHY has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than IBHG's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

FDHY vs. IBHG - Dividend Comparison

FDHY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.52%, more than IBHG's 6.08% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FDHY Fidelity High Yield Factor ETF	6.52%	6.56%	6.58%	6.26%	5.34%	6.09%	5.78%	4.94%	2.55%
IBHG iShares iBonds 2027 Term High Yield and Income ETF	6.08%	6.33%	7.02%	6.66%	5.62%	2.13%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FDHY and IBHG in my portfolio?

FDHY and IBHG have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FDHY or IBHG?

FDHY has higher volatility (1.23%) compared to IBHG (0.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDHY dropped -20.01% vs IBHG's -13.85%.

Which ETF is better, FDHY or IBHG?

On 3-year performance, FDHY leads with 8.66% vs 7.37% for IBHG. On fees, IBHG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, IBHG has been the lower-risk option at 0.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FDHY or IBHG?

Over the 3-year period, FDHY has performed better with a 8.66% return vs 7.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FDHY or IBHG?

IBHG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for FDHY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FDHY or IBHG?

FDHY has the higher dividend yield at 6.52%, compared with 6.08% for IBHG.

What is the main difference between FDHY and IBHG?

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for FDHY and 0.35% for IBHG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FDHY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs 2.20), 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.