PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FLDR vs. WTIU
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FLDR vs. WTIU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR) and MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN (WTIU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLDR achieves a 1.89% return, which is significantly lower than WTIU's 95.37% return.


FLDR

1D
-0.02%
1M
0.10%
6M
1.62%
YTD
1.89%
1Y
4.05%
3Y*
5.25%
5Y*
3.71%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
3.19%

WTIU

1D
-4.60%
1M
39.23%
6M
55.77%
YTD
95.37%
1Y
104.76%
3Y*
-1.04%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
-5.73%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$10.98M$13.45M$20.48M
$1.41M$930.94K$851.49K

FLDR vs. WTIU - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
FLDR
Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF
1.89%5.41%5.71%5.06%
WTIU
MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN
95.37%-17.13%-29.63%-28.45%

Correlation

The correlation between FLDR and WTIU is -0.21, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.


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

-0.21

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

-0.12

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 15, 2023

-0.13

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

FLDR vs. WTIU — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLDR
FLDR Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
FLDR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLDR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLDR Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
FLDR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLDR Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank

WTIU
WTIU Risk / Return Rank: 5555
Overall Rank
WTIU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
WTIU Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
WTIU Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
WTIU Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
WTIU Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
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.

FLDR vs. WTIU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR) and MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN (WTIU). 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.


FLDRWTIUDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+3.61

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+6.30

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

2.39

1.25

+1.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

8.71

2.19

+6.52

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

56.97

4.99

+51.98

FLDR vs. WTIU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLDR Sharpe Ratio is 5.13, which is higher than the WTIU Sharpe Ratio of 1.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLDR and WTIU, 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

FLDR vs. WTIU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLDR drawdown since its inception was -12.23%, smaller than the maximum WTIU drawdown of -75.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLDR and WTIU.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FLDRWTIUDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-12.23%

-75.73%

+63.50%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.47%

-48.11%

+47.64%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-0.76%

-75.73%

+74.97%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-2.31%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.06%

-30.75%

+30.69%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.34%

-39.20%

+38.86%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.07%

21.07%

-21.00%

Volatility

FLDR vs. WTIU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR) is 0.24%, while MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN (WTIU) has a volatility of 22.17%. This indicates that FLDR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than WTIU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FLDRWTIUDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.24%

22.17%

-21.93%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.63%

57.97%

-57.34%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.80%

69.79%

-68.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

1.21%

70.86%

-69.65%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.21%

70.86%

-65.65%

FLDR vs. WTIU - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLDR has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than WTIU's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

FLDR vs. WTIU - Dividend Comparison

FLDR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.29%, while WTIU has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
FLDR
Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF
4.29%4.66%5.50%5.28%2.09%0.51%1.22%2.69%1.38%
WTIU
MicroSectors Energy 3X Leveraged ETN
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FLDR and WTIU have a correlation of -0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

WTIU has higher volatility (22.17%) compared to FLDR (0.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLDR dropped -12.23% vs WTIU's -75.73%.

On 3-year performance, FLDR leads with 5.25% vs -1.04% for WTIU. On fees, FLDR is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FLDR has been the lower-risk option at 0.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, FLDR has performed better with a 5.25% return vs -1.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FLDR is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for WTIU.

FLDR has the higher dividend yield at 4.29%, compared with 0.00% for WTIU.

FLDR is categorized as Short-Term Bond, while WTIU is Leveraged Equities. FLDR tracks Fidelity Low Duration Investment Grade Factor Index, while WTIU tracks Solactive MicroSectors Energy Index - Benchmark TR Gross (--300%). They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and REX. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FLDR and 0.95% for WTIU.

FLDR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.13 vs 1.51), 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 FLDR and WTIU

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