FGLS.NEO vs. BFLX
FGLS.NEO (Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF) and BFLX (iShares Flexible Equity Active ETF) are both Long-Short funds. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.47, they often move in opposite directions. FGLS.NEO charges 1.51%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for BFLX.
Performance
FGLS.NEO vs. BFLX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Different Trading Currencies
FGLS.NEO is traded in CAD, while BFLX is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the BFLX values have been converted to CAD using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
FGLS.NEO
- 1D
- 5.54%
- 1M
- 11.00%
- 6M
- 0.47%
- YTD
- 0.47%
- 1Y
- 3.00%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BFLX
- 1D
- -0.18%
- 1M
- 0.78%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FGLS.NEO vs. BFLX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
FGLS.NEO Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF | 1.66% |
BFLX iShares Flexible Equity Active ETF | 3.37% |
Correlation
The correlation between FGLS.NEO and BFLX is -0.47, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 20, 2026 | -0.47 |
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
FGLS.NEO vs. BFLX — Risk / Return Rank
FGLS.NEO
BFLX
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
FGLS.NEO vs. BFLX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Global Value Long/Short Alternative ETF (FGLS.NEO) and iShares Flexible Equity Active ETF (BFLX). 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.
| FGLS.NEO | BFLX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.04 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.14 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.30 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FGLS.NEO vs. BFLX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FGLS.NEO drawdown since its inception was -25.89%, which is greater than BFLX's maximum drawdown of -3.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FGLS.NEO and BFLX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FGLS.NEO | BFLX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.89% | -3.43% | -22.46% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.12% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.30% | -2.49% | -11.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.47% | -1.03% | -13.44% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.07% | — | — |
Volatility
FGLS.NEO vs. BFLX - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FGLS.NEO | BFLX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.82% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 19.47% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.20% | 16.25% | +9.95% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.51% | 16.25% | +7.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.51% | 16.25% | +7.26% |
FGLS.NEO vs. BFLX - Expense Ratio Comparison
FGLS.NEO has a 1.51% expense ratio, which is higher than BFLX's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
FGLS.NEO vs. BFLX - Dividend Comparison
Neither FGLS.NEO nor BFLX has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
FGLS.NEO and BFLX have a correlation of -0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BFLX is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BFLX is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 1.51% for FGLS.NEO.
They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.51% for FGLS.NEO and 0.40% for BFLX.
Find the right allocation for FGLS.NEO and BFLX
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