PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FLUD vs. TFLO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FLUD vs. TFLO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF (FLUD) and iShares Treasury Floating Rate Bond ETF (TFLO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with FLUD having a 1.53% return and TFLO slightly higher at 1.59%.


FLUD

1D
0.09%
1M
0.41%
YTD
1.53%
6M
1.88%
1Y
4.60%
3Y*
5.33%
5Y*
3.63%
10Y*

TFLO

1D
0.02%
1M
0.31%
YTD
1.59%
6M
1.92%
1Y
3.97%
3Y*
4.74%
5Y*
3.63%
10Y*
2.37%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FLUD vs. TFLO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
FLUD
Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF
1.53%5.36%5.44%5.95%0.16%0.09%0.77%
TFLO
iShares Treasury Floating Rate Bond ETF
1.59%4.22%5.34%5.12%1.99%-0.02%-0.03%

Correlation

The correlation between FLUD and TFLO is 0.08, 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

0.08

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

0.04

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

0.12

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 17, 2020

0.12

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. TFLO — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLUD
FLUD Risk / Return Rank: 9292
Overall Rank
FLUD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLUD Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLUD Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
FLUD Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLUD Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
Martin Ratio Rank

TFLO
TFLO Risk / Return Rank: 100100
Overall Rank
TFLO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TFLO Sortino Ratio Rank: 100100
Sortino Ratio Rank
TFLO Omega Ratio Rank: 100100
Omega Ratio Rank
TFLO Calmar Ratio Rank: 100100
Calmar Ratio Rank
TFLO Martin Ratio Rank: 100100
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.

FLUD vs. TFLO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF (FLUD) and iShares Treasury Floating Rate Bond ETF (TFLO). 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.


FLUDTFLODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-11.33

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-46.45

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.60

13.94

-12.34

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

10.55

201.22

-190.67

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

41.82

823.26

-781.45

FLUD vs. TFLO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLUD Sharpe Ratio is 2.76, which is lower than the TFLO Sharpe Ratio of 14.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLUD and TFLO, 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


FLUDTFLODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.76

14.09

-11.33

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

2.73

10.30

-7.57

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

5.21

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

2.59

0.99

+1.61

Drawdowns

FLUD vs. TFLO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLUD drawdown since its inception was -1.66%, smaller than the maximum TFLO drawdown of -5.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLUD and TFLO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FLUDTFLODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-1.66%

-5.01%

+3.35%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.44%

-0.02%

-0.42%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-0.59%

-0.04%

-0.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-1.66%

-0.13%

-1.53%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-0.16%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.24%

-0.10%

-0.14%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.11%

0.00%

+0.11%

Volatility

FLUD vs. TFLO - Volatility Comparison

Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF (FLUD) has a higher volatility of 0.33% compared to iShares Treasury Floating Rate Bond ETF (TFLO) at 0.07%. This indicates that FLUD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TFLO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FLUDTFLODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.33%

0.07%

+0.26%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.74%

0.20%

+0.54%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.68%

0.28%

+1.40%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

1.34%

0.35%

+0.99%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

1.26%

0.46%

+0.80%

FLUD vs. TFLO - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FLUD and TFLO have an expense ratio of 0.15%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

FLUD vs. TFLO - Dividend Comparison

FLUD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.27%, more than TFLO's 3.90% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
TFLO
iShares Treasury Floating Rate Bond ETF
3.90%4.16%5.21%4.88%1.68%0.00%0.36%2.08%1.65%0.86%0.31%0.15%

Frequently Asked Questions


FLUD and TFLO have a correlation of 0.08, 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 TFLO (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLUD dropped -1.66% vs TFLO's -5.01%.

On 5-year performance, TFLO leads with 3.63% vs 3.63% for FLUD. Both ETFs have the same 0.15% expense ratio. On volatility, TFLO has been the lower-risk option at 0.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, TFLO has performed better with a 3.63% return vs 3.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FLUD and TFLO have the same expense ratio: 0.15% per year.

FLUD has the higher dividend yield at 4.27%, compared with 3.90% for TFLO.

FLUD is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while TFLO is Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iShares.

TFLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (14.09 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FLUD and TFLO

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