FMIL vs. FBND
FMIL (Fidelity New Millennium ETF) and FBND (Fidelity Total Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FMIL is a Large Cap Blend 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 5 years, FMIL returned 15.85%/yr vs 0.83%/yr for FBND. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FMIL charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for FBND.
Performance
FMIL vs. FBND - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FMIL achieves a 10.26% return, which is significantly higher than FBND's 0.50% return.
FMIL
- 1D
- -0.68%
- 1M
- 3.15%
- YTD
- 10.26%
- 6M
- 11.18%
- 1Y
- 26.96%
- 3Y*
- 23.20%
- 5Y*
- 15.85%
- 10Y*
- —
FBND
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- 0.31%
- YTD
- 0.50%
- 6M
- 0.30%
- 1Y
- 5.59%
- 3Y*
- 4.70%
- 5Y*
- 0.83%
- 10Y*
- 2.56%
FMIL vs. FBND - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FMIL Fidelity New Millennium ETF | 10.26% | 17.67% | 27.89% | 25.07% | -0.04% | 24.53% | 18.76% |
FBND Fidelity Total Bond ETF | 0.50% | 7.57% | 2.13% | 6.81% | -12.54% | -0.43% | 4.48% |
Correlation
The correlation between FMIL 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 | 0.22 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2020 | 0.14 |
The correlation between FMIL and FBND shifts across timeframes, from 0.14 (all time) to 0.26 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
FMIL vs. FBND - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FMIL
FBND
Technology
-
Communication Services
-
Financial Services
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
-
Healthcare
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
Utilities
Basic Materials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
FMIL
FBND
-
Communication Services
FMIL
FBND
-
Financial Services
FMIL
FBND
Industrials
FMIL
FBND
Consumer Cyclical
FMIL
FBND
-
Healthcare
FMIL
FBND
-
Consumer Defensive
FMIL
FBND
-
Energy
FMIL
FBND
Utilities
FMIL
FBND
Basic Materials
FMIL
FBND
-
Real Estate
FMIL
FBND
-
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
FMIL vs. FBND — Risk / Return Rank
FMIL
FBND
FMIL vs. FBND - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity New Millennium ETF (FMIL) 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.
| FMIL | FBND | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.66 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.74 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | 1.25 | +0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.71 | 2.11 | +0.61 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.30 | 6.37 | +5.93 |
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
| FMIL | FBND | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.12 | 1.46 | +0.66 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.94 | 0.14 | +0.80 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.42 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.17 | 0.44 | +0.73 |
Drawdowns
FMIL vs. FBND - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FMIL drawdown since its inception was -19.72%, which is greater than FBND's maximum drawdown of -17.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMIL and FBND.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FMIL | FBND | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.72% | -17.25% | -2.47% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.98% | -2.66% | -7.32% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -19.72% | -5.94% | -13.78% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.72% | -17.25% | -2.47% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -17.25% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.68% | -1.43% | +0.75% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.99% | -3.35% | +0.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.20% | 0.88% | +1.32% |
Volatility
FMIL vs. FBND - Volatility Comparison
Fidelity New Millennium ETF (FMIL) has a higher volatility of 3.15% compared to Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) at 1.27%. This indicates that FMIL'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FMIL | FBND | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.15% | 1.27% | +1.88% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.73% | 2.73% | +7.00% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.80% | 3.86% | +8.94% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.92% | 5.92% | +11.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.65% | 6.10% | +11.55% |
FMIL vs. FBND - Expense Ratio Comparison
FMIL has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than FBND's 0.36% expense ratio.
Dividends
FMIL vs. FBND - Dividend Comparison
FMIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.00%, less than FBND's 4.70% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FBND Fidelity Total Bond ETF | 4.70% | 4.70% | 4.73% | 4.26% | 3.07% | 1.86% | 4.25% | 2.90% | 2.93% | 2.56% | 2.84% | 3.26% |
FMIL Fidelity New Millennium ETF | 1.00% | 1.10% | 0.82% | 0.57% | 1.67% | 1.68% | 0.89% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FMIL 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.
FMIL has higher volatility (3.15%) compared to FBND (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FMIL dropped -19.72% vs FBND's -17.25%.
On 5-year performance, FMIL leads with 15.85% vs 0.83% for FBND. On fees, FBND is cheaper at 0.36% per year. On volatility, FBND has been the lower-risk option at 1.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FMIL has performed better with a 15.85% return vs 0.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FBND is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for FMIL.
FBND has the higher dividend yield at 4.70%, compared with 1.00% for FMIL.
FMIL is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while FBND is Intermediate Core-Plus Bond. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for FMIL and 0.36% for FBND.
FMIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.12 vs 1.46), 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 FMIL and FBND
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