FDIF vs. FBND
FDIF (Fidelity Disruptors ETF) and FBND (Fidelity Total Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FDIF is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while FBND is a Intermediate Core-Plus Bond fund actively managed by Fidelity. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FDIF returned 22.85% vs 5.59% for FBND. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FDIF charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for FBND.
Performance
FDIF vs. FBND - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FDIF achieves a 10.12% return, which is significantly higher than FBND's 0.50% return.
FDIF
- 1D
- -0.90%
- 1M
- 5.86%
- YTD
- 10.12%
- 6M
- 10.33%
- 1Y
- 22.85%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
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%
FDIF vs. FBND - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FDIF Fidelity Disruptors ETF | 10.12% | 13.83% | 19.74% | 6.49% |
FBND Fidelity Total Bond ETF | 0.50% | 7.57% | 2.13% | 3.69% |
Correlation
The correlation between FDIF and FBND is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.30 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 21, 2023 | 0.25 |
FDIF vs. FBND - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FDIF
FBND
Technology
-
Healthcare
-
Communication Services
-
Industrials
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
-
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Technology
FDIF
FBND
-
Healthcare
FDIF
FBND
-
Communication Services
FDIF
FBND
-
Industrials
FDIF
FBND
Financial Services
FDIF
FBND
Consumer Cyclical
FDIF
FBND
-
Real Estate
FDIF
FBND
-
Basic Materials
FDIF
-
FBND
-
Consumer Defensive
FDIF
-
FBND
-
Energy
FDIF
-
FBND
Utilities
FDIF
-
FBND
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
FDIF vs. FBND — Risk / Return Rank
FDIF
FBND
FDIF vs. FBND - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Disruptors ETF (FDIF) and Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND). 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.
| FDIF | FBND | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.35 | 1.46 | -0.11 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.91 | 2.17 | -0.25 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.25 | -0.02 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.55 | 2.11 | -0.56 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.86 | 6.37 | -0.51 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FDIF | FBND | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.35 | 1.46 | -0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.14 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.42 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.93 | 0.44 | +0.49 |
Drawdowns
FDIF vs. FBND - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FDIF drawdown since its inception was -22.63%, which is greater than FBND's maximum drawdown of -17.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDIF and FBND.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FDIF | FBND | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.63% | -17.25% | -5.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.80% | -2.66% | -12.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -5.94% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -17.25% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -17.25% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.90% | -1.43% | +0.53% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.83% | -3.35% | -0.48% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.91% | 0.88% | +3.03% |
Volatility
FDIF vs. FBND - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity Disruptors ETF (FDIF) has a higher volatility of 4.11% compared to Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) at 1.27%. This indicates that FDIF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FBND based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FDIF | FBND | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.11% | 1.27% | +2.84% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.37% | 2.73% | +10.64% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.02% | 3.86% | +13.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.59% | 5.92% | +12.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.59% | 6.10% | +12.49% |
FDIF vs. FBND - Expense Ratio Comparison
FDIF has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FBND's 0.36% expense ratio.
Dividends
FDIF vs. FBND - Dividend Comparison
FDIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.30%, less than FBND's 4.70% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
FDIF Fidelity Disruptors ETF | 0.30% | 0.36% | 0.35% | 0.21% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FDIF and FBND have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FDIF has higher volatility (4.11%) compared to FBND (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FDIF dropped -22.63% vs FBND's -17.25%.
On 1-year performance, FDIF leads with 22.85% vs 5.59% for FBND. On fees, FBND is cheaper at 0.36% 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 1-year period, FDIF has performed better with a 22.85% return vs 5.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FBND is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FDIF.
FBND has the higher dividend yield at 4.70%, compared with 0.30% for FDIF.
FDIF is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while FBND is Intermediate Core-Plus Bond. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FDIF and 0.36% for FBND.
FBND currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.46 vs 1.35), 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.
Find the right allocation for FDIF and FBND
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