FLDR vs. ACLO

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

FLDR (Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF) and ACLO (TCW AAA CLO ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLDR is a Short-Term Bond fund tracking the Fidelity Low Duration Investment Grade Factor Index, while ACLO is a CLO fund actively managed by TCW. FLDR is passively managed, while ACLO is actively managed. Over the past year, FLDR returned 4.58% vs 5.30% for ACLO. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. FLDR charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ACLO.

Performance

FLDR vs. ACLO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR) and TCW AAA CLO ETF (ACLO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLDR achieves a 1.72% return, which is significantly lower than ACLO's 2.46% return.

FLDR

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.49%
• YTD: 1.72%
• 6M: 1.84%
• 1Y: 4.58%
• 3Y*: 5.34%
• 5Y*: 3.74%
• 10Y*: —

ACLO

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.46%
• YTD: 2.46%
• 6M: 2.51%
• 1Y: 5.30%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FLDR vs. ACLO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FLDR Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF	1.72%	5.41%	0.55%
ACLO TCW AAA CLO ETF	2.46%	5.32%	0.81%

Correlation

The correlation between FLDR and ACLO is -0.13, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.13
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 18, 2024	-0.01

The correlation between FLDR and ACLO shifts across timeframes, from -0.13 (1 year) to -0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

FLDR vs. ACLO — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLDR

FLDR Risk / Return Rank: 98
FLDR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
FLDR Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
FLDR Omega Ratio Rank: 99
FLDR Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
FLDR Martin Ratio Rank: 98

ACLO

ACLO Risk / Return Rank: 99
ACLO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
ACLO Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
ACLO Omega Ratio Rank: 99
ACLO Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
ACLO Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

FLDR vs. ACLO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR) and TCW AAA CLO ETF (ACLO). 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.

	FLDR	ACLO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	5.69	7.32	-1.63
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	9.57	15.12	-5.55
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.63	3.44	-0.80
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.83	19.85	-10.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	67.02	165.43	-98.41

FLDR vs. ACLO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLDR Sharpe Ratio is 5.69, which is comparable to the ACLO Sharpe Ratio of 7.32. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLDR and ACLO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FLDR vs. ACLO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLDR drawdown since its inception was -12.23%, which is greater than ACLO's maximum drawdown of -1.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLDR and ACLO.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLDR	ACLO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.23%	-1.01%	-11.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.47%	-0.27%	-0.20%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.76%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-2.33%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.35%	-0.04%	-0.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.07%	0.03%	+0.04%

Volatility

FLDR vs. ACLO - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR) and TCW AAA CLO ETF (ACLO) have volatilities of 0.19% and 0.19%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLDR	ACLO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.19%	0.19%	0.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.60%	0.58%	+0.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.81%	0.73%	+0.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.21%	1.07%	+0.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.25%	1.07%	+4.18%

FLDR vs. ACLO - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLDR has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than ACLO's 0.20% 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

FLDR vs. ACLO - Dividend Comparison

FLDR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.41%, less than ACLO's 4.90% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
ACLO TCW AAA CLO ETF	4.90%	4.87%	0.59%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FLDR Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF	4.41%	4.66%	5.50%	5.28%	2.09%	0.51%	1.22%	2.69%	1.38%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLDR and ACLO in my portfolio?

FLDR and ACLO have a correlation of -0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLDR or ACLO?

ACLO has higher volatility (0.19%) compared to FLDR (0.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLDR dropped -12.23% vs ACLO's -1.01%.

Which ETF is better, FLDR or ACLO?

On 1-year performance, ACLO leads with 5.30% vs 4.58% for FLDR. On fees, FLDR is cheaper at 0.15% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLDR or ACLO?

Over the 1-year period, ACLO has performed better with a 5.30% return vs 4.58%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLDR or ACLO?

FLDR is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for ACLO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLDR or ACLO?

ACLO has the higher dividend yield at 4.90%, compared with 4.41% for FLDR.

What is the main difference between FLDR and ACLO?

FLDR is categorized as Short-Term Bond, while ACLO is CLO. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FLDR and 0.20% for ACLO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ACLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (7.32 vs 5.69), 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.