FLDFX vs. FLFGX

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

FLDFX (Meeder Balanced Fund) and FLFGX (Meeder Global Allocation Fund) are both mutual funds - FLDFX is a Tactical Allocation fund managed by Meeder Funds, while FLFGX is a Global Allocation fund managed by Meeder Funds. Over the past 10 years, FLDFX returned 9.01%/yr vs 9.78%/yr for FLFGX. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. FLDFX charges 1.39%/yr vs 1.81%/yr for FLFGX.

Performance

FLDFX vs. FLFGX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Meeder Balanced Fund (FLDFX) and Meeder Global Allocation Fund (FLFGX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLDFX achieves a 8.59% return, which is significantly lower than FLFGX's 12.48% return. Over the past 10 years, FLDFX has underperformed FLFGX with an annualized return of 9.01%, while FLFGX has yielded a comparatively higher 9.78% annualized return.

FLDFX

• 1D: 0.41%
• 1M: 2.23%
• YTD: 8.59%
• 6M: 8.93%
• 1Y: 20.16%
• 3Y*: 18.61%
• 5Y*: 9.95%
• 10Y*: 9.01%

FLFGX

• 1D: 0.39%
• 1M: 2.91%
• YTD: 12.48%
• 6M: 12.99%
• 1Y: 24.55%
• 3Y*: 21.01%
• 5Y*: 10.84%
• 10Y*: 9.78%

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

FLDFX vs. FLFGX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLDFX Meeder Balanced Fund	8.59%	12.35%	26.72%	12.08%	-11.07%	13.22%	5.27%	12.29%	-3.25%	14.74%
FLFGX Meeder Global Allocation Fund	12.48%	18.82%	22.53%	15.37%	-12.93%	12.57%	2.99%	13.17%	-6.93%	22.34%

Correlation

The correlation between FLDFX and FLFGX is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.98
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.96
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.95
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 3, 2006	0.96

The correlation between FLDFX and FLFGX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FLDFX vs. FLFGX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLDFX

FLDFX Risk / Return Rank: 64
FLDFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
FLDFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
FLDFX Omega Ratio Rank: 62
FLDFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
FLDFX Martin Ratio Rank: 67

FLFGX

FLFGX Risk / Return Rank: 57
FLFGX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
FLFGX Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
FLFGX Omega Ratio Rank: 52
FLFGX Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
FLFGX Martin Ratio Rank: 68

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.

FLDFX vs. FLFGX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Meeder Balanced Fund (FLDFX) and Meeder Global Allocation Fund (FLFGX). 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.

	FLDFX	FLFGX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.31	2.13	+0.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.28	2.99	+0.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.38	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.87	2.85	+0.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.56	12.55	+0.01
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FLDFX vs. FLFGX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLDFX Sharpe Ratio is 2.31, which is comparable to the FLFGX Sharpe Ratio of 2.13. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLDFX and FLFGX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FLDFX	FLFGX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.31	2.13	+0.19
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.85	0.72	+0.13
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.85	0.70	+0.15
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.53	0.32	+0.21

Drawdowns

FLDFX vs. FLFGX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLDFX drawdown since its inception was -36.88%, smaller than the maximum FLFGX drawdown of -60.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLDFX and FLFGX.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLDFX	FLFGX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.88%	-60.31%	+23.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.19%	-8.89%	+1.70%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.47%	-14.63%	+3.16%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.41%	-28.54%	+8.13%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-20.41%	-28.54%	+8.13%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.14%	-0.39%	+0.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.97%	-11.46%	+3.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.64%	2.01%	-0.37%

Volatility

FLDFX vs. FLFGX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Meeder Balanced Fund (FLDFX) is 2.59%, while Meeder Global Allocation Fund (FLFGX) has a volatility of 3.63%. This indicates that FLDFX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLFGX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLDFX	FLFGX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.59%	3.63%	-1.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.00%	9.46%	-2.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.91%	11.90%	-2.99%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.76%	15.19%	-3.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.60%	13.92%	-3.32%

FLDFX vs. FLFGX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLDFX has a 1.39% expense ratio, which is lower than FLFGX's 1.81% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLDFX vs. FLFGX - Dividend Comparison

FLDFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.23%, less than FLFGX's 12.59% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLDFX Meeder Balanced Fund	3.23%	3.50%	26.22%	1.58%	3.76%	8.15%	0.60%	1.43%	1.41%	6.08%	1.11%	1.26%
FLFGX Meeder Global Allocation Fund	12.59%	14.35%	25.20%	1.64%	0.77%	11.13%	2.22%	2.12%	5.05%	1.41%	1.14%	3.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLDFX and FLFGX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.98, FLDFX and FLFGX move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, FLDFX or FLFGX?

FLFGX has higher volatility (3.63%) compared to FLDFX (2.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLDFX dropped -36.88% vs FLFGX's -60.31%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLDFX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.31 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.