FLUD vs. ICSH
FLUD (Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF) and ICSH (iShares Ultra Short Duration Bond Active ETF) are both Ultrashort Bond funds. FLUD is actively managed, while ICSH is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLUD returned 3.63%/yr vs 3.67%/yr for ICSH. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FLUD charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for ICSH.
Performance
FLUD vs. ICSH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FLUD achieves a 1.53% return, which is significantly higher than ICSH's 1.45% return.
FLUD
- 1D
- 0.09%
- 1M
- 0.41%
- YTD
- 1.53%
- 6M
- 1.88%
- 1Y
- 4.60%
- 3Y*
- 5.33%
- 5Y*
- 3.63%
- 10Y*
- —
ICSH
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.34%
- YTD
- 1.45%
- 6M
- 1.79%
- 1Y
- 4.36%
- 3Y*
- 5.20%
- 5Y*
- 3.67%
- 10Y*
- 2.76%
FLUD vs. ICSH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLUD Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF | 1.53% | 5.36% | 5.44% | 5.95% | 0.16% | 0.09% | 0.77% |
ICSH iShares Ultra Short Duration Bond Active ETF | 1.45% | 4.96% | 5.52% | 5.58% | 0.97% | 0.16% | 0.29% |
Correlation
The correlation between FLUD and ICSH is 0.05, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.05 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.10 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 17, 2020 | 0.19 |
The correlation between FLUD and ICSH shifts across timeframes, from 0.05 (1 year) to 0.21 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
FLUD vs. ICSH - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FLUD
ICSH
Financial Services
-
Industrials
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Real Estate
-
Healthcare
-
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Utilities
Technology
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
FLUD
ICSH
-
Industrials
FLUD
ICSH
-
Consumer Cyclical
FLUD
ICSH
-
Real Estate
FLUD
ICSH
-
Healthcare
FLUD
ICSH
-
Basic Materials
FLUD
ICSH
-
Communication Services
FLUD
ICSH
-
Consumer Defensive
FLUD
ICSH
-
Utilities
FLUD
ICSH
Technology
FLUD
ICSH
-
Energy
FLUD
ICSH
-
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
FLUD vs. ICSH — Risk / Return Rank
FLUD
ICSH
FLUD vs. ICSH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF (FLUD) and iShares Ultra Short Duration Bond Active ETF (ICSH). 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.
| FLUD | ICSH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -8.47 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -24.05 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.60 | 6.79 | -5.19 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 10.55 | 44.30 | -33.74 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 41.82 | 297.17 | -255.35 |
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
| FLUD | ICSH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.76 | 11.22 | -8.47 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 2.73 | 7.64 | -4.90 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 2.62 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.59 | 1.93 | +0.66 |
Drawdowns
FLUD vs. ICSH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLUD drawdown since its inception was -1.66%, smaller than the maximum ICSH drawdown of -3.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLUD and ICSH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FLUD | ICSH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -1.66% | -3.94% | +2.28% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.44% | -0.10% | -0.34% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -0.59% | -0.10% | -0.49% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -1.66% | -0.73% | -0.93% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -3.94% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.24% | -0.08% | -0.16% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.11% | 0.01% | +0.10% |
Volatility
FLUD vs. ICSH - Volatility Comparison
Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF (FLUD) has a higher volatility of 0.33% compared to iShares Ultra Short Duration Bond Active ETF (ICSH) at 0.15%. This indicates that FLUD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ICSH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FLUD | ICSH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.33% | 0.15% | +0.18% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.74% | 0.30% | +0.44% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.68% | 0.39% | +1.29% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.34% | 0.48% | +0.86% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.26% | 1.06% | +0.20% |
FLUD vs. ICSH - Expense Ratio Comparison
FLUD has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than ICSH's 0.08% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
FLUD vs. ICSH - Dividend Comparison
FLUD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.27%, less than ICSH's 4.34% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLUD Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF | 4.27% | 4.51% | 4.97% | 4.72% | 1.39% | 0.92% | 0.93% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ICSH iShares Ultra Short Duration Bond Active ETF | 4.34% | 4.55% | 5.24% | 4.78% | 1.66% | 0.42% | 1.21% | 2.61% | 2.20% | 1.36% | 0.88% | 0.54% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FLUD and ICSH have a correlation of 0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FLUD has higher volatility (0.33%) compared to ICSH (0.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLUD dropped -1.66% vs ICSH's -3.94%.
On 5-year performance, ICSH leads with 3.67% vs 3.63% for FLUD. On fees, ICSH is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, ICSH has been the lower-risk option at 0.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, ICSH has performed better with a 3.67% return vs 3.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ICSH is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for FLUD.
ICSH has the higher dividend yield at 4.34%, compared with 4.27% for FLUD.
They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FLUD and 0.08% for ICSH.
ICSH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.22 vs 2.76), 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 FLUD and ICSH
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