FLM vs. ROBT
FLM (First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF) and ROBT (First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence & Robotics ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLM is a Building & Construction fund tracking the ISE Global Engineering & Construction Index, while ROBT is a Technology Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq CTA Artificial Intelligence and Robotics Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLM returned 10.76%/yr vs 2.38%/yr for ROBT. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FLM charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for ROBT.
Performance
FLM vs. ROBT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FLM achieves a 19.89% return, which is significantly higher than ROBT's 14.22% 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%
ROBT
- 1D
- -1.73%
- 1M
- 13.18%
- YTD
- 14.22%
- 6M
- 12.64%
- 1Y
- 30.71%
- 3Y*
- 10.10%
- 5Y*
- 2.38%
- 10Y*
- —
FLM vs. ROBT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLM First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF | 19.89% | 13.99% | 17.94% | 19.36% | -9.87% | 12.98% | 0.51% | 12.81% | -20.43% |
ROBT First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence & Robotics ETF | 14.22% | 15.16% | -0.41% | 27.77% | -34.94% | 9.91% | 46.18% | 34.28% | -13.98% |
Correlation
The correlation between FLM and ROBT is 0.62, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.62 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.70 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.73 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 23, 2018 | 0.72 |
The correlation between FLM and ROBT shifts across timeframes, from 0.62 (1 year) to 0.73 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
FLM vs. ROBT - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FLM
ROBT
Industrials
Energy
Technology
Basic Materials
-
Real Estate
-
Communication Services
Utilities
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
FLM
ROBT
Energy
FLM
ROBT
Technology
FLM
ROBT
Basic Materials
FLM
ROBT
-
Real Estate
FLM
ROBT
-
Communication Services
FLM
ROBT
Utilities
FLM
ROBT
-
Consumer Cyclical
FLM
-
ROBT
Consumer Defensive
FLM
-
ROBT
Financial Services
FLM
-
ROBT
Healthcare
FLM
-
ROBT
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. ROBT — Risk / Return Rank
FLM
ROBT
FLM vs. ROBT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF (FLM) and First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence & Robotics ETF (ROBT). 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.
| FLM | ROBT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.82 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.05 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.22 | +0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.01 | 1.42 | +2.58 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.80 | 4.09 | +9.71 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FLM | ROBT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.15 | 1.32 | +0.82 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.64 | 0.09 | +0.55 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.45 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.38 | 0.35 | +0.03 |
Drawdowns
FLM vs. ROBT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLM drawdown since its inception was -50.07%, which is greater than ROBT's maximum drawdown of -44.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLM and ROBT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FLM | ROBT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -50.07% | -44.47% | -5.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.19% | -21.66% | +14.47% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.14% | -27.68% | +8.54% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.71% | -43.26% | +19.55% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -50.07% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.71% | -1.73% | +1.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.84% | -15.97% | +5.13% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.08% | 7.53% | -5.45% |
Volatility
FLM vs. ROBT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF (FLM) is 4.27%, while First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence & Robotics ETF (ROBT) has a volatility of 6.46%. This indicates that FLM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ROBT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FLM | ROBT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.27% | 6.46% | -2.19% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.39% | 17.51% | -7.12% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.45% | 23.32% | -9.87% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.82% | 25.18% | -8.36% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.73% | 25.48% | -6.75% |
FLM vs. ROBT - Expense Ratio Comparison
FLM has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than ROBT's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
FLM vs. ROBT - Dividend Comparison
FLM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.01%, while ROBT has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
ROBT First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence & Robotics ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.68% | 0.23% | 0.35% | 0.06% | 0.17% | 0.42% | 0.44% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FLM and ROBT have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ROBT has higher volatility (6.46%) compared to FLM (4.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLM dropped -50.07% vs ROBT's -44.47%.
On 5-year performance, FLM leads with 10.76% vs 2.38% for ROBT. On fees, ROBT is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, FLM has been the lower-risk option at 4.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FLM has performed better with a 10.76% return vs 2.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ROBT is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for FLM.
FLM has the higher dividend yield at 1.01%, compared with 0.00% for ROBT.
FLM is categorized as Building & Construction, while ROBT is Technology Equities. FLM tracks ISE Global Engineering & Construction Index, while ROBT tracks Nasdaq CTA Artificial Intelligence and Robotics Index. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for FLM and 0.65% for ROBT.
FLM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.15 vs 1.32), 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.
Find the right allocation for FLM and ROBT
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