IBHL vs. FCLO

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

IBHL (iShares iBonds 2032 Term High Yield and Income ETF) and FCLO (Fidelity CLO ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBHL is a High Yield Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg 2032 Term High Yield and Income Index, while FCLO is a CLO fund actively managed by Fidelity. IBHL is passively managed, while FCLO is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.08, they often move in opposite directions. IBHL charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for FCLO.

Performance

IBHL vs. FCLO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds 2032 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHL) and Fidelity CLO ETF (FCLO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

IBHL

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 0.68%
• YTD: 1.17%
• 6M: 1.25%
• 1Y: 6.07%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FCLO

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.36%
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IBHL vs. FCLO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
IBHL iShares iBonds 2032 Term High Yield and Income ETF	0.51%
FCLO Fidelity CLO ETF	1.87%

Correlation

The correlation between IBHL and FCLO is -0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 12, 2026	-0.08

Return for Risk

IBHL vs. FCLO — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBHL

IBHL Risk / Return Rank: 51
IBHL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
IBHL Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
IBHL Omega Ratio Rank: 50
IBHL Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
IBHL Martin Ratio Rank: 57

FCLO

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

IBHL vs. FCLO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds 2032 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHL) and Fidelity CLO ETF (FCLO). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	IBHL	FCLO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.48	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.24	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.01	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.81	—	—

Drawdowns

IBHL vs. FCLO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBHL drawdown since its inception was -3.70%, which is greater than FCLO's maximum drawdown of -0.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBHL and FCLO.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBHL	FCLO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.70%	-0.58%	-3.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.03%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.15%	-0.06%	-0.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.45%	-0.08%	-0.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.69%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	IBHL	FCLO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.15%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.31%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.15%	1.35%	+2.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.36%	1.35%	+4.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.36%	1.35%	+4.01%

IBHL vs. FCLO - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBHL has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than FCLO's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBHL vs. FCLO - Dividend Comparison

IBHL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.28%, more than FCLO's 1.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
FCLO Fidelity CLO ETF	1.56%	0.00%
IBHL iShares iBonds 2032 Term High Yield and Income ETF	6.28%	4.90%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBHL and FCLO in my portfolio?

IBHL and FCLO have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, IBHL or FCLO?

On fees, IBHL is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBHL or FCLO?

IBHL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for FCLO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBHL or FCLO?

IBHL has the higher dividend yield at 6.28%, compared with 1.56% for FCLO.

What is the main difference between IBHL and FCLO?

IBHL is categorized as High Yield Bonds, while FCLO is CLO. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for IBHL and 0.45% for FCLO.