PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FLM vs. NFLT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FLM vs. NFLT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF (FLM) and Virtus Newfleet Multi-Sector Bond ETF (NFLT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLM achieves a 19.89% return, which is significantly higher than NFLT's 1.50% return. Over the past 10 years, FLM has outperformed NFLT with an annualized return of 8.40%, while NFLT has yielded a comparatively lower 4.13% annualized return.


FLM

1D
-0.36%
1M
0.95%
YTD
19.89%
6M
18.51%
1Y
28.68%
3Y*
22.72%
5Y*
10.76%
10Y*
8.40%

NFLT

1D
-0.16%
1M
0.47%
YTD
1.50%
6M
1.58%
1Y
7.11%
3Y*
7.38%
5Y*
3.15%
10Y*
4.13%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FLM vs. NFLT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FLM
First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF
19.89%13.99%17.94%19.36%-9.87%12.98%0.51%12.81%-21.72%22.95%
NFLT
Virtus Newfleet Multi-Sector Bond ETF
1.50%8.77%6.05%9.16%-9.49%1.18%8.02%10.13%-2.68%6.30%

Correlation

The correlation between FLM and NFLT is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.28

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.28

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.29

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.20

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 12, 2015

0.18

The correlation between FLM and NFLT shifts across timeframes, from 0.18 (all time) to 0.29 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FLM vs. NFLT - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FLM
NFLT

Industrials

37.1%

-

Energy

8.1%

-

Technology

7.9%
0.0%

Basic Materials

7.4%

-

Real Estate

5.7%
0.0%

Communication Services

0.7%

-

Utilities

0.7%
2.7%

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Financial Services

-

0.9%

Healthcare

-

0.0%

Industrials

FLM
37.1%
NFLT

-

Energy

FLM
8.1%
NFLT

-

Technology

FLM
7.9%
NFLT
0.0%

Basic Materials

FLM
7.4%
NFLT

-

Real Estate

FLM
5.7%
NFLT
0.0%

Communication Services

FLM
0.7%
NFLT

-

Utilities

FLM
0.7%
NFLT
2.7%

Consumer Cyclical

FLM

-

NFLT

-

Consumer Defensive

FLM

-

NFLT

-

Financial Services

FLM

-

NFLT
0.9%

Healthcare

FLM

-

NFLT
0.0%

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

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

FLM
FLM Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
FLM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLM Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
FLM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLM Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
Martin Ratio Rank

NFLT
NFLT Risk / Return Rank: 5757
Overall Rank
NFLT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NFLT Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
NFLT Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
NFLT Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
NFLT Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

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.


FLMNFLTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.37

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.32

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.33

+0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.01

2.95

+1.05

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.80

13.00

+0.80

FLM vs. NFLT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLM Sharpe Ratio is 2.15, which is comparable to the NFLT Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLM and NFLT, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FLMNFLTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.15

1.78

+0.37

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.64

0.71

-0.07

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.45

0.84

-0.39

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.38

0.84

-0.46

Drawdowns

FLM vs. NFLT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLM drawdown since its inception was -50.07%, which is greater than NFLT's maximum drawdown of -15.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLM and NFLT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FLMNFLTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-50.07%

-15.17%

-34.90%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.19%

-2.42%

-4.77%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.14%

-3.24%

-15.90%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.71%

-13.42%

-10.29%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-50.07%

-15.17%

-34.90%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.71%

-0.33%

-0.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.84%

-2.10%

-8.74%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.08%

0.55%

+1.53%

Volatility

FLM vs. NFLT - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF (FLM) has a higher volatility of 4.27% compared to Virtus Newfleet Multi-Sector Bond ETF (NFLT) at 1.19%. This indicates that FLM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NFLT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FLMNFLTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.27%

1.19%

+3.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.39%

2.90%

+7.49%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.45%

4.01%

+9.44%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.82%

4.43%

+12.39%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.73%

4.93%

+13.80%

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's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, less than NFLT's 5.50% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FLM
First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF
1.01%1.19%1.31%1.16%2.10%1.45%2.88%1.84%1.74%1.49%2.01%1.17%
NFLT
Virtus Newfleet Multi-Sector Bond ETF
5.50%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 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FLM has higher volatility (4.27%) compared to NFLT (1.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLM dropped -50.07% vs NFLT's -15.17%.

On 10-year performance, FLM leads with 8.40% vs 4.13% for NFLT. On fees, NFLT is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, NFLT has been the lower-risk option at 1.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FLM has performed better with a 8.40% return vs 4.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

NFLT is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for FLM.

NFLT has the higher dividend yield at 5.50%, compared with 1.01% 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.

FLM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.15 vs 1.78), 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 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