FLM vs. NFLT
FLM (First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF) and NFLT (Virtus Newfleet Multi-Sector Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLM is a Building & Construction fund tracking the ISE Global Engineering & Construction Index, while NFLT is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by Virtus. FLM is passively managed, while NFLT is actively managed. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLM charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for NFLT.
Performance
FLM vs. NFLT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
FLM
- 1D
- -4.55%
- 1M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NFLT
- 1D
- -0.09%
- 1M
- 0.81%
- YTD
- 1.82%
- 6M
- 1.75%
- 1Y
- 7.05%
- 3Y*
- 7.44%
- 5Y*
- 3.14%
- 10Y*
- 4.06%
FLM vs. NFLT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
FLM First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF | -4.55% |
NFLT Virtus Newfleet Multi-Sector Bond ETF | 0.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between FLM and NFLT is 0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2026 | 0.04 |
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
FLM vs. NFLT — Risk / Return Rank
FLM
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
NFLT
FLM vs. NFLT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF (FLM) and Virtus Newfleet Multi-Sector Bond ETF (NFLT). 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.
| FLM | NFLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.32 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.93 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 12.71 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FLM vs. NFLT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLM drawdown since its inception was -4.55%, smaller than the maximum NFLT drawdown of -15.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLM and NFLT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FLM | NFLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.55% | -15.17% | +10.62% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -2.42% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -3.24% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -13.42% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -15.17% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.55% | -0.58% | -3.97% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.27% | -2.09% | -0.18% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.56% | — |
Volatility
FLM vs. NFLT - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FLM | NFLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 1.56% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 3.14% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 51.02% | 4.19% | +46.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 51.02% | 4.47% | +46.55% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 51.02% | 4.94% | +46.08% |
FLM vs. NFLT - Expense Ratio Comparison
FLM has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than NFLT's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
FLM vs. NFLT - Dividend Comparison
FLM has not paid dividends to shareholders, while NFLT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.49%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLM First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
NFLT Virtus Newfleet Multi-Sector Bond ETF | 5.49% | 5.74% | 5.76% | 6.02% | 4.16% | 3.41% | 3.63% | 4.33% | 4.81% | 6.23% | 5.30% | 0.67% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FLM and NFLT have a correlation of 0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, NFLT is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
NFLT is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for FLM.
NFLT has the higher dividend yield at 5.49%, compared with 0.00% for FLM.
FLM is categorized as Building & Construction, while NFLT is Multisector Bonds. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Virtus. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for FLM and 0.50% for NFLT.
Find the right allocation for FLM and NFLT
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