PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FTVFX vs. NCBVX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FTVFX vs. NCBVX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Advisor Value Fund Class M (FTVFX) and PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund (NCBVX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with FTVFX having a 16.44% return and NCBVX slightly lower at 15.75%. Over the past 10 years, FTVFX has outperformed NCBVX with an annualized return of 11.52%, while NCBVX has yielded a comparatively lower 7.74% annualized return.


FTVFX

1D
0.29%
1M
3.44%
YTD
16.44%
6M
17.70%
1Y
33.92%
3Y*
18.31%
5Y*
9.67%
10Y*
11.52%

NCBVX

1D
0.67%
1M
4.13%
YTD
15.75%
6M
16.02%
1Y
30.32%
3Y*
17.51%
5Y*
7.60%
10Y*
7.74%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FTVFX vs. NCBVX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FTVFX
Fidelity Advisor Value Fund Class M
16.44%10.74%9.80%19.10%-9.60%34.39%9.19%31.01%-18.21%14.69%
NCBVX
PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund
15.75%11.86%10.49%10.40%-10.18%33.13%-7.31%18.78%-20.51%11.63%

Correlation

The correlation between FTVFX and NCBVX is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.93

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

0.94

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

0.96

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.96

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 26, 2003

0.96

The correlation between FTVFX and NCBVX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

FTVFX vs. NCBVX — Risk / Return Rank

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

FTVFX
FTVFX Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
FTVFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FTVFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
FTVFX Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
FTVFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
FTVFX Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank

NCBVX
NCBVX Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
NCBVX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NCBVX Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
NCBVX Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
NCBVX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
NCBVX Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
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.

FTVFX vs. NCBVX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Advisor Value Fund Class M (FTVFX) and PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund (NCBVX). 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.


FTVFXNCBVXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.18

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.23

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

1.43

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.63

5.02

-1.40

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.32

18.22

-4.90

FTVFX vs. NCBVX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FTVFX Sharpe Ratio is 2.25, which is comparable to the NCBVX Sharpe Ratio of 2.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FTVFX and NCBVX, 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


FTVFXNCBVXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.25

2.44

-0.18

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.47

0.41

+0.07

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.52

0.34

+0.18

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.41

0.41

0.00

Drawdowns

FTVFX vs. NCBVX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FTVFX drawdown since its inception was -67.12%, which is greater than NCBVX's maximum drawdown of -60.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTVFX and NCBVX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FTVFXNCBVXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-67.12%

-60.64%

-6.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.97%

-6.31%

-3.66%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.49%

-21.27%

-3.22%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.49%

-23.15%

-1.34%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-48.60%

-57.50%

+8.90%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.96%

-9.10%

-0.86%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.71%

1.74%

+0.97%

Volatility

FTVFX vs. NCBVX - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Advisor Value Fund Class M (FTVFX) has a higher volatility of 4.17% compared to PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund (NCBVX) at 3.49%. This indicates that FTVFX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NCBVX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FTVFXNCBVXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.17%

3.49%

+0.68%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.40%

9.42%

+1.98%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.05%

13.02%

+3.03%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.48%

18.81%

+1.67%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.15%

22.67%

-0.52%

FTVFX vs. NCBVX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FTVFX has a 1.40% expense ratio, which is lower than NCBVX's 1.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

FTVFX vs. NCBVX - Dividend Comparison

FTVFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.02%, more than NCBVX's 0.59% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FTVFX
Fidelity Advisor Value Fund Class M
7.02%8.17%12.39%0.62%0.12%4.24%0.24%2.83%14.49%2.94%0.43%1.87%
NCBVX
PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund
0.59%0.68%1.03%1.59%1.17%0.74%1.60%1.93%13.70%6.69%2.83%7.89%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.93, FTVFX and NCBVX move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

FTVFX has higher volatility (4.17%) compared to NCBVX (3.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FTVFX dropped -67.12% vs NCBVX's -60.64%.

NCBVX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.44 vs 2.25), 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 FTVFX and NCBVX

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