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

Performance

FDIF vs. FBND - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Disruptors ETF (FDIF) and Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

FDIF vs. FBND - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
FDIF
Fidelity Disruptors ETF
-8.38%13.83%19.74%6.49%
FBND
Fidelity Total Bond ETF
0.14%7.57%2.13%3.69%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FDIF achieves a -8.38% return, which is significantly lower than FBND's 0.14% return.


FDIF

1D
4.27%
1M
-6.49%
YTD
-8.38%
6M
-7.56%
1Y
11.20%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

FBND

1D
0.31%
1M
-1.78%
YTD
0.14%
6M
1.01%
1Y
4.73%
3Y*
4.42%
5Y*
1.01%
10Y*
2.79%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


FDIF vs. FBND - Expense Ratio Comparison

FDIF has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FBND's 0.36% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

FDIF vs. FBND — Risk / Return Rank

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

FDIF
FDIF Risk / Return Rank: 3030
Overall Rank
FDIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FDIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
FDIF Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
FDIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
FDIF Martin Ratio Rank: 3131
Martin Ratio Rank

FBND
FBND Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
FBND Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBND Sortino Ratio Rank: 6262
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBND Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
FBND Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBND Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
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.

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.


FDIFFBNDDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.52

1.07

-0.55

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

0.89

1.50

-0.61

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.12

1.19

-0.07

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.70

1.82

-1.13

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

2.56

5.71

-3.15

FDIF vs. FBND - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FDIF Sharpe Ratio is 0.52, which is lower than the FBND Sharpe Ratio of 1.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FDIF and FBND, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FDIFFBNDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.52

1.07

-0.55

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.17

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.46

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.58

0.44

+0.14

Correlation

The correlation between FDIF and FBND is 0.23, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.


Dividends

FDIF vs. FBND - Dividend Comparison

FDIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.36%, less than FBND's 4.73% yield.


TTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FDIF
Fidelity Disruptors ETF
0.36%0.36%0.35%0.21%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
FBND
Fidelity Total Bond ETF
4.73%4.70%4.73%4.26%3.07%1.86%4.25%2.90%2.93%2.56%2.84%3.26%

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 graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


FDIFFBNDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.63%

-17.25%

-5.38%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.80%

-2.79%

-12.01%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.25%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-17.25%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-11.16%

-1.78%

-9.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.94%

-3.38%

-0.56%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.03%

0.89%

+3.14%

Volatility

FDIF vs. FBND - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Disruptors ETF (FDIF) has a higher volatility of 7.92% compared to Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) at 1.66%. 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 graphics...

Volatility by Period


FDIFFBNDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.92%

1.66%

+6.26%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.45%

2.62%

+10.83%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.56%

4.45%

+17.11%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.66%

5.90%

+12.76%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.66%

6.09%

+12.57%