PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GILAX vs. LBNDX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GILAX vs. LBNDX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lord Abbett Fundamental Equity Fund (GILAX) and Lord Abbett Bond Debenture Fund (LBNDX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GILAX achieves a 3.39% return, which is significantly higher than LBNDX's 1.63% return. Over the past 10 years, GILAX has outperformed LBNDX with an annualized return of 9.89%, while LBNDX has yielded a comparatively lower 4.31% annualized return.


GILAX

1D
0.29%
1M
-0.64%
YTD
3.39%
6M
3.77%
1Y
18.20%
3Y*
17.04%
5Y*
9.65%
10Y*
9.89%

LBNDX

1D
0.00%
1M
0.52%
YTD
1.63%
6M
1.99%
1Y
8.47%
3Y*
7.17%
5Y*
1.66%
10Y*
4.31%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GILAX vs. LBNDX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GILAX
Lord Abbett Fundamental Equity Fund
3.39%16.30%19.60%12.26%-10.02%28.08%2.02%21.75%-9.73%11.44%
LBNDX
Lord Abbett Bond Debenture Fund
1.63%8.42%6.29%6.38%-13.67%3.25%7.65%13.40%-3.76%9.23%

Correlation

The correlation between GILAX and LBNDX is 0.51, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.51

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

0.53

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

0.49

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

0.49

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 4, 1994

0.53

The correlation between GILAX and LBNDX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.49 to 0.53 - 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

GILAX vs. LBNDX — Risk / Return Rank

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

GILAX
GILAX Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
GILAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GILAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
GILAX Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
GILAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 4141
Calmar Ratio Rank
GILAX Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
Martin Ratio Rank

LBNDX
LBNDX Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
LBNDX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LBNDX Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
LBNDX Omega Ratio Rank: 6262
Omega Ratio Rank
LBNDX Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
LBNDX Martin Ratio Rank: 4040
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.

GILAX vs. LBNDX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lord Abbett Fundamental Equity Fund (GILAX) and Lord Abbett Bond Debenture Fund (LBNDX). 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.


GILAXLBNDXDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.79

2.14

-0.35

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.58

3.28

-0.70

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.44

-0.12

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.45

2.12

+0.33

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

9.60

8.69

+0.91

GILAX vs. LBNDX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GILAX Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is comparable to the LBNDX Sharpe Ratio of 2.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GILAX and LBNDX, 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


GILAXLBNDXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.79

2.14

-0.35

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.62

0.36

+0.27

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.55

0.86

-0.30

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.53

1.10

-0.57

Drawdowns

GILAX vs. LBNDX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GILAX drawdown since its inception was -47.62%, which is greater than LBNDX's maximum drawdown of -26.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GILAX and LBNDX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GILAXLBNDXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-47.62%

-26.67%

-20.95%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.67%

-4.08%

-3.59%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.32%

-4.51%

-11.81%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.46%

-17.33%

-3.13%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.77%

-19.77%

-19.00%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.16%

-0.36%

-1.80%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.84%

-3.52%

-2.32%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.96%

0.99%

+0.97%

Volatility

GILAX vs. LBNDX - Volatility Comparison

Lord Abbett Fundamental Equity Fund (GILAX) has a higher volatility of 2.66% compared to Lord Abbett Bond Debenture Fund (LBNDX) at 1.17%. This indicates that GILAX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LBNDX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GILAXLBNDXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.66%

1.17%

+1.49%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.09%

3.14%

+4.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.55%

4.05%

+6.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.57%

4.69%

+10.88%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.96%

5.04%

+12.92%

GILAX vs. LBNDX - Expense Ratio Comparison

GILAX has a 1.71% expense ratio, which is higher than LBNDX's 0.77% expense ratio.


Dividends

GILAX vs. LBNDX - Dividend Comparison

GILAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.60%, more than LBNDX's 6.04% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
GILAX
Lord Abbett Fundamental Equity Fund
8.60%8.89%7.47%0.14%5.58%13.50%0.84%11.27%9.48%12.37%4.89%10.61%
LBNDX
Lord Abbett Bond Debenture Fund
6.04%5.92%5.38%4.66%3.67%3.71%3.72%4.02%6.43%4.82%4.58%5.50%

Frequently Asked Questions


GILAX and LBNDX have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GILAX has higher volatility (2.66%) compared to LBNDX (1.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GILAX dropped -47.62% vs LBNDX's -26.67%.

LBNDX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.14 vs 1.79), 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 GILAX and LBNDX

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