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

Performance

FHLC vs. FBND - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FHLC achieves a -3.90% return, which is significantly lower than FBND's 0.50% return. Over the past 10 years, FHLC has outperformed FBND with an annualized return of 9.14%, while FBND has yielded a comparatively lower 2.56% annualized return.


FHLC

1D
0.82%
1M
1.50%
YTD
-3.90%
6M
-4.11%
1Y
14.43%
3Y*
6.14%
5Y*
4.50%
10Y*
9.14%

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

FHLC vs. FBND - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FHLC
Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF
-3.90%15.42%2.48%2.58%-5.55%20.39%18.13%21.94%4.71%23.34%
FBND
Fidelity Total Bond ETF
0.50%7.57%2.13%6.81%-12.54%-0.43%9.41%9.82%-0.57%3.52%

Correlation

The correlation between FHLC 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 (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.28

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.27

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.15

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 10, 2014

0.12

The correlation between FHLC and FBND shifts across timeframes, from 0.12 (all time) to 0.30 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FHLC vs. FBND - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FHLC
FBND

Healthcare

99.6%

-

Financial Services

0.1%
0.2%

Technology

0.0%

-

Industrials

0.0%
71.4%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

1.1%

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

27.5%

Healthcare

FHLC
99.6%
FBND

-

Financial Services

FHLC
0.1%
FBND
0.2%

Technology

FHLC
0.0%
FBND

-

Industrials

FHLC
0.0%
FBND
71.4%

Basic Materials

FHLC

-

FBND

-

Communication Services

FHLC

-

FBND

-

Consumer Cyclical

FHLC

-

FBND

-

Consumer Defensive

FHLC

-

FBND

-

Energy

FHLC

-

FBND
1.1%

Real Estate

FHLC

-

FBND

-

Utilities

FHLC

-

FBND
27.5%

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

FHLC vs. FBND — Risk / Return Rank

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

FHLC
FHLC Risk / Return Rank: 2727
Overall Rank
FHLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2727
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FHLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 2929
Sortino Ratio Rank
FHLC Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
FHLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
FHLC Martin Ratio Rank: 2626
Martin Ratio Rank

FBND
FBND Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
FBND Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBND Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBND Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
FBND Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBND Martin Ratio Rank: 3939
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.

FHLC vs. FBND - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) 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.


FHLCFBNDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.44

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.59

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.25

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.40

2.11

-0.71

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.52

6.37

-2.85

FHLC vs. FBND - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FHLC Sharpe Ratio is 1.01, which is lower than the FBND Sharpe Ratio of 1.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FHLC and FBND, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FHLCFBNDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.01

1.46

-0.44

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.30

0.14

+0.16

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.55

0.42

+0.12

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.61

0.44

+0.16

Drawdowns

FHLC vs. FBND - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FHLC drawdown since its inception was -28.76%, which is greater than FBND's maximum drawdown of -17.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FHLC and FBND.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FHLCFBNDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.76%

-17.25%

-11.51%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.38%

-2.66%

-7.72%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.87%

-5.94%

-10.93%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.73%

-17.25%

-0.48%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.76%

-17.25%

-11.51%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.96%

-1.43%

-5.53%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.19%

-3.35%

-1.84%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.11%

0.88%

+3.23%

Volatility

FHLC vs. FBND - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) has a higher volatility of 4.05% compared to Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) at 1.27%. This indicates that FHLC'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


FHLCFBNDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.05%

1.27%

+2.78%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.11%

2.73%

+7.38%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.33%

3.86%

+10.47%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.97%

5.92%

+9.05%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.81%

6.10%

+10.71%

FHLC vs. FBND - Expense Ratio Comparison

FHLC has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than FBND's 0.36% expense ratio.


Dividends

FHLC vs. FBND - Dividend Comparison

FHLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.43%, less than FBND's 4.70% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
FHLC
Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF
1.43%1.40%1.51%1.40%1.30%1.16%1.45%1.18%1.38%1.38%1.40%2.07%

Frequently Asked Questions


FHLC 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.

FHLC has higher volatility (4.05%) compared to FBND (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FHLC dropped -28.76% vs FBND's -17.25%.

On 10-year performance, FHLC leads with 9.14% vs 2.56% for FBND. On fees, FHLC is cheaper at 0.08% 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 10-year period, FHLC has performed better with a 9.14% return vs 2.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FHLC is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for FBND.

FBND has the higher dividend yield at 4.70%, compared with 1.43% for FHLC.

FHLC is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while FBND is Intermediate Core-Plus Bond. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for FHLC and 0.36% for FBND.

FBND currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.46 vs 1.01), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FHLC 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