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

Performance

FHLC vs. FLDR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) and Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR). 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 0.03% return, which is significantly lower than FLDR's 1.58% return.


FHLC

1D
-0.13%
1M
4.40%
YTD
0.03%
6M
0.58%
1Y
15.99%
3Y*
7.18%
5Y*
4.76%
10Y*
9.76%

FLDR

1D
0.06%
1M
0.39%
YTD
1.58%
6M
1.88%
1Y
4.74%
3Y*
5.36%
5Y*
3.70%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FHLC vs. FLDR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
FHLC
Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF
0.03%15.42%2.48%2.58%-5.55%20.39%18.13%21.94%-0.88%
FLDR
Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF
1.58%5.41%5.71%6.32%-0.33%-0.18%2.01%4.52%0.84%

Correlation

The correlation between FHLC and FLDR is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.19

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.18

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

0.15

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2018

0.06

The correlation between FHLC and FLDR shifts across timeframes, from 0.06 (all time) to 0.19 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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. FLDR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FHLC
FHLC Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
FHLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3434
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FHLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
FHLC Omega Ratio Rank: 3232
Omega Ratio Rank
FHLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 3535
Calmar Ratio Rank
FHLC Martin Ratio Rank: 3030
Martin Ratio Rank

FLDR
FLDR Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
FLDR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLDR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLDR Omega Ratio Rank: 9999
Omega Ratio Rank
FLDR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLDR Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
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. FLDR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) and Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR). 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.


FHLCFLDRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-4.81

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-8.27

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

2.73

-1.53

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.55

10.19

-8.65

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.86

69.63

-65.77

FHLC vs. FLDR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FHLC Sharpe Ratio is 1.09, which is lower than the FLDR Sharpe Ratio of 5.90. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FHLC and FLDR, 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...

Drawdowns

FHLC vs. FLDR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FHLC drawdown since its inception was -28.76%, which is greater than FLDR's maximum drawdown of -12.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FHLC and FLDR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FHLCFLDRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-28.76%

-12.23%

-16.53%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.38%

-0.47%

-9.91%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.87%

-0.76%

-16.11%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.73%

-2.33%

-15.40%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.76%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.15%

0.00%

-3.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.19%

-0.35%

-4.84%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.16%

0.07%

+4.09%

Volatility

FHLC vs. FLDR - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF (FHLC) has a higher volatility of 4.87% compared to Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR) at 0.20%. This indicates that FHLC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLDR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FHLCFLDRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.87%

0.20%

+4.67%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.50%

0.59%

+9.91%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.69%

0.81%

+13.88%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.02%

1.21%

+13.81%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.84%

5.25%

+11.59%

FHLC vs. FLDR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FHLC has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than FLDR's 0.15% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

FHLC vs. FLDR - Dividend Comparison

FHLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.37%, less than FLDR's 4.42% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FHLC
Fidelity MSCI Health Care Index ETF
1.37%1.40%1.51%1.40%1.30%1.16%1.45%1.18%1.38%1.38%1.40%2.07%
FLDR
Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF
4.42%4.66%5.50%5.28%2.09%0.51%1.22%2.69%1.38%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FHLC and FLDR have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FHLC has higher volatility (4.87%) compared to FLDR (0.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FHLC dropped -28.76% vs FLDR's -12.23%.

On 5-year performance, FHLC leads with 4.76% vs 3.70% for FLDR. On fees, FHLC is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, FLDR has been the lower-risk option at 0.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FHLC has performed better with a 4.76% return vs 3.70%. 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 0.15% for FLDR.

FLDR has the higher dividend yield at 4.42%, compared with 1.37% for FHLC.

FHLC is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while FLDR is Corporate Bonds. FHLC tracks MSCI USA IMI Health Care Index, while FLDR tracks Fidelity Low Duration Investment Grade Factor Index. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for FHLC and 0.15% for FLDR.

FLDR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.90 vs 1.09), 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 FLDR

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