PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FLMFX vs. FLBDX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FLMFX vs. FLBDX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Meeder Muirfield Fund (FLMFX) and Meeder Tactical Income Fund (FLBDX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLMFX achieves a 11.12% return, which is significantly higher than FLBDX's 1.97% return. Over the past 10 years, FLMFX has outperformed FLBDX with an annualized return of 11.91%, while FLBDX has yielded a comparatively lower 3.17% annualized return.


FLMFX

1D
0.27%
1M
4.32%
YTD
11.12%
6M
12.11%
1Y
27.53%
3Y*
23.71%
5Y*
13.57%
10Y*
11.91%

FLBDX

1D
0.00%
1M
0.44%
YTD
1.97%
6M
2.28%
1Y
7.73%
3Y*
7.16%
5Y*
3.22%
10Y*
3.17%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FLMFX vs. FLBDX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FLMFX
Meeder Muirfield Fund
11.12%15.28%36.53%13.79%-11.16%20.18%4.36%13.52%-3.65%20.30%
FLBDX
Meeder Tactical Income Fund
1.97%7.28%6.64%7.10%-5.71%-2.01%7.46%7.24%-1.67%3.72%

Correlation

The correlation between FLMFX and FLBDX 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

0.49

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

0.45

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

0.26

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 19, 2011

0.24

Over the past year, FLMFX and FLBDX have become more correlated (0.62) than their long-term average of 0.24, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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

FLMFX vs. FLBDX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLMFX
FLMFX Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
FLMFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLMFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLMFX Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
FLMFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLMFX Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank

FLBDX
FLBDX Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
FLBDX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLBDX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLBDX Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
FLBDX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLBDX Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
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.

FLMFX vs. FLBDX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Meeder Muirfield Fund (FLMFX) and Meeder Tactical Income Fund (FLBDX). 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.


FLMFXFLBDXDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.36

3.27

-0.92

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.24

5.05

-1.81

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.70

-0.28

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.03

4.69

-1.65

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

13.31

18.88

-5.57

FLMFX vs. FLBDX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLMFX Sharpe Ratio is 2.36, which is comparable to the FLBDX Sharpe Ratio of 3.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLMFX and FLBDX, 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


FLMFXFLBDXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.36

3.27

-0.92

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.94

1.21

-0.27

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.85

1.08

-0.23

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.65

0.99

-0.35

Drawdowns

FLMFX vs. FLBDX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLMFX drawdown since its inception was -42.42%, which is greater than FLBDX's maximum drawdown of -8.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLMFX and FLBDX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FLMFXFLBDXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-42.42%

-8.74%

-33.68%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.26%

-1.65%

-7.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.08%

-2.51%

-13.57%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.19%

-8.16%

-10.03%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-24.33%

-8.74%

-15.59%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.27%

-1.93%

-7.34%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.11%

0.41%

+1.70%

Volatility

FLMFX vs. FLBDX - Volatility Comparison

Meeder Muirfield Fund (FLMFX) has a higher volatility of 3.30% compared to Meeder Tactical Income Fund (FLBDX) at 0.75%. This indicates that FLMFX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLBDX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FLMFXFLBDXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.30%

0.75%

+2.55%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.17%

1.81%

+7.36%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.00%

2.38%

+9.62%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.54%

2.67%

+11.87%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.06%

2.94%

+11.12%

FLMFX vs. FLBDX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLMFX has a 1.20% expense ratio, which is higher than FLBDX's 1.11% expense ratio.


Dividends

FLMFX vs. FLBDX - Dividend Comparison

FLMFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.91%, more than FLBDX's 4.58% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FLBDX
Meeder Tactical Income Fund
4.58%4.67%4.35%3.57%1.68%1.56%1.81%2.32%2.03%2.70%2.90%2.78%
FLMFX
Meeder Muirfield Fund
4.91%5.55%31.99%2.83%2.76%3.39%0.58%2.69%1.50%8.25%0.72%2.72%

Frequently Asked Questions


FLMFX and FLBDX 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.

FLMFX has higher volatility (3.30%) compared to FLBDX (0.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLMFX dropped -42.42% vs FLBDX's -8.74%.

FLBDX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.27 vs 2.36), 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 FLMFX and FLBDX

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