FPFD vs. ICVT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FPFD (Fidelity Preferred Securities & Income ETF) and ICVT (iShares Convertible Bond ETF) are both Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds funds. FPFD is actively managed, while ICVT is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FPFD returned 7.66%/yr vs 21.04%/yr for ICVT. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FPFD charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ICVT.

Performance

FPFD vs. ICVT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Preferred Securities & Income ETF (FPFD) and iShares Convertible Bond ETF (ICVT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FPFD achieves a 0.73% return, which is significantly lower than ICVT's 25.28% return.

FPFD

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: -0.51%
• YTD: 0.73%
• 6M: 0.81%
• 1Y: 6.27%
• 3Y*: 7.66%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ICVT

• 1D: -0.97%
• 1M: 7.16%
• YTD: 25.28%
• 6M: 24.31%
• 1Y: 42.20%
• 3Y*: 21.04%
• 5Y*: 7.79%
• 10Y*: 13.99%

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

FPFD vs. ICVT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FPFD Fidelity Preferred Securities & Income ETF	0.73%	6.46%	8.50%	10.91%	-17.11%	1.89%
ICVT iShares Convertible Bond ETF	25.28%	18.10%	10.61%	15.35%	-20.66%	-4.57%

Correlation

The correlation between FPFD and ICVT is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.45
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2021	0.46

FPFD vs. ICVT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FPFD	ICVT
Financial Services	16.4%	-
Utilities	5.4%	-
Communication Services	3.5%	-
Real Estate	1.6%	-
Technology	1.2%	55.2%
Industrials	0.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	0.3%	13.0%
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	44.8%

Return for Risk

FPFD vs. ICVT — Risk / Return Rank

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

FPFD

FPFD Risk / Return Rank: 59
FPFD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
FPFD Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
FPFD Omega Ratio Rank: 69
FPFD Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
FPFD Martin Ratio Rank: 51

ICVT

ICVT Risk / Return Rank: 87
ICVT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
ICVT Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
ICVT Omega Ratio Rank: 84
ICVT Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
ICVT Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

FPFD vs. ICVT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Preferred Securities & Income ETF (FPFD) and iShares Convertible Bond ETF (ICVT). 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.

	FPFD	ICVT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.14	2.95	-0.82
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.14	3.84	-0.70
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.52	-0.10
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.29	5.62	-3.33
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.64	20.48	-11.84
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FPFD vs. ICVT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FPFD Sharpe Ratio is 2.14, which is comparable to the ICVT Sharpe Ratio of 2.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FPFD and ICVT, 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

	FPFD	ICVT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.14	2.95	-0.82
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.59	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.91	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.33	0.78	-0.45

Drawdowns

FPFD vs. ICVT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FPFD drawdown since its inception was -20.83%, smaller than the maximum ICVT drawdown of -33.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FPFD and ICVT.

Drawdown Indicators

	FPFD	ICVT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.83%	-33.25%	+12.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.75%	-7.55%	+4.80%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-4.92%	-11.22%	+6.30%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-29.95%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-33.25%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.23%	-0.97%	-0.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.82%	-9.50%	+2.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.73%	2.07%	-1.34%

Volatility

FPFD vs. ICVT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Fidelity Preferred Securities & Income ETF (FPFD) is 1.00%, while iShares Convertible Bond ETF (ICVT) has a volatility of 5.53%. This indicates that FPFD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ICVT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FPFD	ICVT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.00%	5.53%	-4.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.24%	11.69%	-9.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.95%	14.36%	-11.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.32%	13.23%	-7.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.32%	15.50%	-10.18%

FPFD vs. ICVT - Expense Ratio Comparison

FPFD has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than ICVT's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

FPFD vs. ICVT - Dividend Comparison

FPFD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.15%, more than ICVT's 1.30% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FPFD Fidelity Preferred Securities & Income ETF	5.15%	5.04%	4.89%	5.09%	5.22%	1.59%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ICVT iShares Convertible Bond ETF	1.30%	1.73%	2.19%	1.85%	1.93%	7.70%	3.98%	1.86%	4.82%	2.56%	3.06%	1.57%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FPFD and ICVT in my portfolio?

FPFD and ICVT have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FPFD or ICVT?

ICVT has higher volatility (5.53%) compared to FPFD (1.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FPFD dropped -20.83% vs ICVT's -33.25%.

Which ETF is better, FPFD or ICVT?

On 3-year performance, ICVT leads with 21.04% vs 7.66% for FPFD. On fees, ICVT is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, FPFD has been the lower-risk option at 1.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FPFD or ICVT?

Over the 3-year period, ICVT has performed better with a 21.04% return vs 7.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FPFD or ICVT?

ICVT is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for FPFD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FPFD or ICVT?

FPFD has the higher dividend yield at 5.15%, compared with 1.30% for ICVT.

What is the main difference between FPFD and ICVT?

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for FPFD and 0.20% for ICVT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ICVT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.95 vs 2.14), 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.