PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FIGB vs. FLTB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FIGB vs. FLTB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Investment Grade Bond ETF (FIGB) and Fidelity Limited Term Bond ETF (FLTB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FIGB achieves a 0.14% return, which is significantly lower than FLTB's 0.81% return.


FIGB

1D
-0.14%
1M
0.11%
YTD
0.14%
6M
0.08%
1Y
4.93%
3Y*
4.09%
5Y*
0.24%
10Y*

FLTB

1D
-0.03%
1M
0.33%
YTD
0.81%
6M
1.01%
1Y
4.69%
3Y*
5.53%
5Y*
2.25%
10Y*
2.48%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FIGB vs. FLTB - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
FIGB
Fidelity Investment Grade Bond ETF
0.14%6.95%1.51%6.65%-13.43%1.77%
FLTB
Fidelity Limited Term Bond ETF
0.81%6.60%5.14%5.94%-5.88%-0.59%

Correlation

The correlation between FIGB and FLTB is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.70

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

0.72

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

0.76

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 5, 2021

0.75

The correlation between FIGB and FLTB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

FIGB vs. FLTB — Risk / Return Rank

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

FIGB
FIGB Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
FIGB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3232
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FIGB Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
FIGB Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
FIGB Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
FIGB Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
Martin Ratio Rank

FLTB
FLTB Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
FLTB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLTB Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLTB Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
FLTB Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLTB Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
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.

FIGB vs. FLTB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Investment Grade Bond ETF (FIGB) and Fidelity Limited Term Bond ETF (FLTB). 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.


FIGBFLTBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.02

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.68

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.21

1.42

-0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.69

3.09

-1.40

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.25

13.08

-7.83

FIGB vs. FLTB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FIGB Sharpe Ratio is 1.19, which is lower than the FLTB Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FIGB and FLTB, 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


FIGBFLTBDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.19

2.21

-1.02

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.04

0.81

-0.77

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.85

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.07

0.83

-0.77

Drawdowns

FIGB vs. FLTB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FIGB drawdown since its inception was -18.08%, which is greater than FLTB's maximum drawdown of -9.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FIGB and FLTB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FIGBFLTBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.08%

-9.37%

-8.71%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.93%

-1.52%

-1.41%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-6.17%

-1.52%

-4.65%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.08%

-9.26%

-8.82%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-9.37%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.60%

-0.29%

-1.31%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.92%

-1.40%

-5.52%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.94%

0.36%

+0.58%

Volatility

FIGB vs. FLTB - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Investment Grade Bond ETF (FIGB) has a higher volatility of 1.42% compared to Fidelity Limited Term Bond ETF (FLTB) at 0.63%. This indicates that FIGB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLTB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FIGBFLTBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.42%

0.63%

+0.79%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.87%

1.64%

+1.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.16%

2.13%

+2.03%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.28%

2.80%

+3.48%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.17%

2.94%

+3.23%

FIGB vs. FLTB - Expense Ratio Comparison

FIGB has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is higher than FLTB's 0.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

FIGB vs. FLTB - Dividend Comparison

FIGB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.11%, less than FLTB's 4.36% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FIGB
Fidelity Investment Grade Bond ETF
4.11%4.15%4.28%3.79%2.44%1.10%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
FLTB
Fidelity Limited Term Bond ETF
4.36%4.31%4.11%3.20%1.63%0.89%1.56%2.67%2.50%1.78%1.59%1.63%

Frequently Asked Questions


FIGB and FLTB have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FIGB has higher volatility (1.42%) compared to FLTB (0.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FIGB dropped -18.08% vs FLTB's -9.37%.

On 5-year performance, FLTB leads with 2.25% vs 0.24% for FIGB. On fees, FLTB is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, FLTB has been the lower-risk option at 0.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FLTB has performed better with a 2.25% return vs 0.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FLTB is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for FIGB.

FLTB has the higher dividend yield at 4.36%, compared with 4.11% for FIGB.

FIGB is categorized as Intermediate Core Bond, while FLTB is Short-Term Bond. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for FIGB and 0.25% for FLTB.

FLTB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 vs 1.19), 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 FIGB and FLTB

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