FMET vs. FBND

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

FMET (Fidelity Metaverse ETF) and FBND (Fidelity Total Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FMET is a Communications Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while FBND is a Intermediate Core-Plus Bond fund actively managed by Fidelity. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FMET returned 17.27%/yr vs 4.77%/yr for FBND. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FMET charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for FBND.

Performance

FMET vs. FBND - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Metaverse ETF (FMET) and Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FMET achieves a 11.46% return, which is significantly higher than FBND's 0.70% return.

FMET

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: 9.41%
• YTD: 11.46%
• 6M: 11.72%
• 1Y: 30.24%
• 3Y*: 17.27%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FBND

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 0.23%
• YTD: 0.70%
• 6M: 0.67%
• 1Y: 5.75%
• 3Y*: 4.77%
• 5Y*: 0.94%
• 10Y*: 2.58%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FMET vs. FBND - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FMET Fidelity Metaverse ETF	11.46%	21.93%	6.76%	39.18%	-16.56%
FBND Fidelity Total Bond ETF	0.70%	7.57%	2.13%	6.81%	-3.99%

Correlation

The correlation between FMET and FBND is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.26
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 22, 2022	0.25

FMET vs. FBND - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FMET	FBND
Technology	56.5%	-
Communication Services	35.2%	-
Real Estate	8.3%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	1.1%
Financial Services	-	0.2%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	71.4%
Utilities	-	27.5%

Return for Risk

FMET vs. FBND — Risk / Return Rank

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

FMET

FMET Risk / Return Rank: 36
FMET Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
FMET Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
FMET Omega Ratio Rank: 43
FMET Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
FMET Martin Ratio Rank: 26

FBND

FBND Risk / Return Rank: 41
FBND Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
FBND Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
FBND Omega Ratio Rank: 40
FBND Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
FBND Martin Ratio Rank: 39

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.

FMET vs. FBND - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Metaverse ETF (FMET) and Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND). 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.

	FMET	FBND	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.56	1.50	+0.06
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.16	2.23	-0.07
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.26	+0.01
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.39	2.06	-0.68
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	3.70	6.28	-2.58
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FMET vs. FBND - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FMET Sharpe Ratio is 1.56, which is comparable to the FBND Sharpe Ratio of 1.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FMET and FBND, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FMET	FBND	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.56	1.50	+0.06
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.16	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.42	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.56	0.45	+0.12

Drawdowns

FMET vs. FBND - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FMET drawdown since its inception was -29.22%, which is greater than FBND's maximum drawdown of -17.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMET and FBND.

Drawdown Indicators

	FMET	FBND	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.22%	-17.25%	-11.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.00%	-2.66%	-20.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.02%	-5.94%	-19.08%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-17.25%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-17.25%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.23%	+1.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.48%	-3.35%	-4.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.63%	0.88%	+7.75%

Volatility

FMET vs. FBND - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Metaverse ETF (FMET) has a higher volatility of 5.87% compared to Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) at 1.28%. This indicates that FMET's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FBND based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FMET	FBND	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.87%	1.28%	+4.59%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.67%	2.76%	+11.91%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.48%	3.86%	+15.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.20%	5.92%	+18.28%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.20%	6.10%	+18.10%

FMET vs. FBND - Expense Ratio Comparison

FMET has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than FBND's 0.36% expense ratio.

Dividends

FMET vs. FBND - Dividend Comparison

FMET's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.50%, less than FBND's 4.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FBND Fidelity Total Bond ETF	4.69%	4.70%	4.73%	4.26%	3.07%	1.86%	4.25%	2.90%	2.93%	2.56%	2.84%	3.26%
FMET Fidelity Metaverse ETF	0.50%	0.81%	0.44%	0.40%	0.18%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FMET and FBND in my portfolio?

FMET and FBND have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FMET or FBND?

FMET has higher volatility (5.87%) compared to FBND (1.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FMET dropped -29.22% vs FBND's -17.25%.

Which ETF is better, FMET or FBND?

On 3-year performance, FMET leads with 17.27% vs 4.77% for FBND. On fees, FBND is cheaper at 0.36% per year. On volatility, FBND has been the lower-risk option at 1.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FMET or FBND?

Over the 3-year period, FMET has performed better with a 17.27% return vs 4.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FMET or FBND?

FBND is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for FMET.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FMET or FBND?

FBND has the higher dividend yield at 4.69%, compared with 0.50% for FMET.

What is the main difference between FMET and FBND?

FMET is categorized as Communications Equities, while FBND is Intermediate Core-Plus Bond. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for FMET and 0.36% for FBND.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FMET currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.56 vs 1.50), 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.