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 0.80% return, which is significantly lower than FCFAX's 1.50% return. Over the past 10 years, FILDX has underperformed FCFAX with an annualized return of 2.21%, while FCFAX has yielded a comparatively higher 4.72% annualized return.


FILDX

1D
0.10%
1M
0.04%
6M
0.59%
YTD
0.80%
1Y
2.80%
3Y*
4.76%
5Y*
2.12%
10Y*
2.21%
ALL TIME*
1.97%

FCFAX

1D
0.22%
1M
-0.32%
6M
0.81%
YTD
1.50%
1Y
3.10%
3Y*
6.68%
5Y*
3.57%
10Y*
4.72%
ALL TIME*
4.38%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$0.00$0.00$0.00
$0.00$0.00$0.00

FILDX vs. FCFAX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FILDX
Frost Low Duration Bond Fund
0.80%5.26%4.87%5.71%-4.80%-0.35%4.25%3.22%1.83%1.77%
FCFAX
Frost Credit Fund
1.50%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 0.70, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.70

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.70

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.71

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.60

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 2, 2013

0.50

Over the past year, FILDX and FCFAX have become more correlated (0.70) than their long-term average of 0.50, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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 historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FILDX
FILDX Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
FILDX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FILDX Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
FILDX Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
FILDX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
FILDX Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank

FCFAX
FCFAX Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
FCFAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCFAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCFAX Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
FCFAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCFAX Martin Ratio Rank: 3737
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

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.

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.


FILDXFCFAXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.34

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.27

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.47

1.78

+0.69

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.16

6.22

+1.94

FILDX vs. FCFAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FILDX Sharpe Ratio is 1.70, which is comparable to the FCFAX Sharpe Ratio of 1.43. 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...

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

-7.13%

-10.49%

+3.36%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-7.20%

-16.33%

+9.13%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.12%

-0.43%

+0.31%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.60%

-1.51%

-0.09%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.33%

0.52%

-0.19%

Volatility

FILDX vs. FCFAX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Frost Low Duration Bond Fund (FILDX) is 0.39%, while Frost Credit Fund (FCFAX) has a volatility of 0.71%. 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

0.39%

0.71%

-0.32%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.29%

1.84%

-0.55%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.60%

2.27%

-0.67%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

2.18%

2.79%

-0.61%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

1.84%

3.20%

-1.36%

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 4.23%, less than FCFAX's 6.32% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FCFAX
Frost Credit Fund
6.32%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
4.23%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 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FCFAX has higher volatility (0.71%) compared to FILDX (0.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FILDX dropped -7.20% vs FCFAX's -16.33%.

FILDX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.70 vs 1.43), 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