PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FILDX vs. FCFAX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FILDX vs. FCFAX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Frost Low Duration Bond Fund (FILDX) and Frost Credit Fund (FCFAX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FILDX achieves a 0.51% return, which is significantly lower than FCFAX's 1.47% return. Over the past 10 years, FILDX has underperformed FCFAX with an annualized return of 2.23%, while FCFAX has yielded a comparatively higher 5.21% annualized return.


FILDX

1D
0.00%
1M
0.11%
YTD
0.51%
6M
0.76%
1Y
3.85%
3Y*
4.84%
5Y*
2.11%
10Y*
2.23%

FCFAX

1D
0.00%
1M
0.72%
YTD
1.47%
6M
1.23%
1Y
5.12%
3Y*
7.27%
5Y*
3.83%
10Y*
5.21%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FILDX vs. FCFAX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FILDX
Frost Low Duration Bond Fund
0.51%5.26%4.87%5.71%-4.80%-0.35%4.25%3.22%1.83%1.77%
FCFAX
Frost Credit Fund
1.47%5.21%8.01%11.23%-7.83%5.07%6.22%6.95%0.89%7.95%

Correlation

The correlation between FILDX and FCFAX is 0.69, 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

0.69

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

0.70

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

0.71

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

0.59

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2013

0.50

The correlation between FILDX and FCFAX shifts across timeframes, from 0.50 (all time) to 0.71 (5 years), 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

FILDX vs. FCFAX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FILDX
FILDX Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
FILDX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FILDX Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
FILDX Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
FILDX Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
FILDX Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
Martin Ratio Rank

FCFAX
FCFAX Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
FCFAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCFAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCFAX Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
FCFAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCFAX Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
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.

FILDX vs. FCFAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Frost Low Duration Bond Fund (FILDX) and Frost Credit Fund (FCFAX). 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.


FILDXFCFAXDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.13

2.34

-0.21

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.27

3.58

-0.31

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.47

-0.02

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.41

2.89

+0.52

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

12.12

10.81

+1.31

FILDX vs. FCFAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FILDX Sharpe Ratio is 2.13, which is comparable to the FCFAX Sharpe Ratio of 2.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FILDX and FCFAX, 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


FILDXFCFAXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.13

2.34

-0.21

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.97

1.39

-0.42

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

1.22

1.61

-0.39

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.97

1.45

-0.49

Drawdowns

FILDX vs. FCFAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FILDX drawdown since its inception was -7.20%, smaller than the maximum FCFAX drawdown of -16.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FILDX and FCFAX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FILDXFCFAXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-7.20%

-16.33%

+9.13%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.10%

-1.82%

+0.72%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-1.14%

-2.82%

+1.68%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-7.20%

-10.49%

+3.29%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-7.20%

-16.33%

+9.13%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.41%

0.00%

-0.41%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.60%

-1.53%

-0.07%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.31%

0.48%

-0.17%

Volatility

FILDX vs. FCFAX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Frost Low Duration Bond Fund (FILDX) is 0.51%, while Frost Credit Fund (FCFAX) has a volatility of 0.81%. This indicates that FILDX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FCFAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FILDXFCFAXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.51%

0.81%

-0.30%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.23%

1.74%

-0.51%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.76%

2.26%

-0.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

2.17%

2.76%

-0.59%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

1.83%

3.24%

-1.41%

FILDX vs. FCFAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FILDX has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is lower than FCFAX's 0.96% expense ratio.


Dividends

FILDX vs. FCFAX - Dividend Comparison

FILDX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.22%, less than FCFAX's 6.16% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FCFAX
Frost Credit Fund
6.16%6.10%5.76%5.93%5.00%3.65%3.69%4.62%5.05%5.85%4.84%4.95%
FILDX
Frost Low Duration Bond Fund
4.22%3.61%4.45%3.65%1.86%1.98%2.02%2.18%1.90%1.76%1.63%1.35%

Frequently Asked Questions


FILDX and FCFAX have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FCFAX has higher volatility (0.81%) compared to FILDX (0.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FILDX dropped -7.20% vs FCFAX's -16.33%.

FCFAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.34 vs 2.13), 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 FILDX and FCFAX

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