FGBMX vs. IMCDX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FGBMX (Fidelity Advisor New Markets Income Fund Class Z) and IMCDX (Voya Emerging Markets Corporate Debt Fund) are both Emerging Markets Bonds funds. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FGBMX charges 0.73%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for IMCDX.

Performance

FGBMX vs. IMCDX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Advisor New Markets Income Fund Class Z (FGBMX) and Voya Emerging Markets Corporate Debt Fund (IMCDX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

FGBMX

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: 0.99%
• YTD: 3.92%
• 6M: 4.47%
• 1Y: 15.89%
• 3Y*: 13.00%
• 5Y*: 3.94%
• 10Y*: —

IMCDX

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FGBMX vs. IMCDX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FGBMX Fidelity Advisor New Markets Income Fund Class Z	3.92%	14.93%	6.88%	14.10%	-16.03%	-2.36%	4.63%	10.73%	0.15%
IMCDX Voya Emerging Markets Corporate Debt Fund	0.00%	0.00%	6.44%	8.51%	-13.79%	0.08%	8.35%	13.65%	0.76%

Correlation

The correlation between FGBMX and IMCDX is 0.64, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.52
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 6, 2018	0.64

The correlation between FGBMX and IMCDX shifts across timeframes, from 0.52 (3 years) to 0.64 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FGBMX vs. IMCDX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FGBMX

FGBMX Risk / Return Rank: 94
FGBMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
FGBMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
FGBMX Omega Ratio Rank: 96
FGBMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
FGBMX Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

FGBMX vs. IMCDX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Advisor New Markets Income Fund Class Z (FGBMX) and Voya Emerging Markets Corporate Debt Fund (IMCDX). 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.

	FGBMX	IMCDX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.76	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.32	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.82	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.29	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.82	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FGBMX	IMCDX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.76	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.60	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.61	—	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	FGBMX	IMCDX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.12%	—	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.85%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-6.40%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.12%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	—	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.13%	—	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.88%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	FGBMX	IMCDX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.55%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.55%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.40%	—	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.61%	—	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.29%	—	—

FGBMX vs. IMCDX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FGBMX has a 0.73% expense ratio, which is higher than IMCDX's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

FGBMX vs. IMCDX - Dividend Comparison

FGBMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.95%, while IMCDX has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FGBMX Fidelity Advisor New Markets Income Fund Class Z	4.95%	5.13%	4.79%	5.24%	4.00%	3.55%	4.14%	4.62%	0.43%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IMCDX Voya Emerging Markets Corporate Debt Fund	0.00%	0.00%	4.08%	4.21%	3.80%	6.14%	4.64%	4.99%	5.30%	4.79%	5.22%	5.11%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FGBMX and IMCDX in my portfolio?

FGBMX and IMCDX have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.