ICBMX vs. FMAT

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

ICBMX (ICON Natural Resources and Infrastructure Fund) and FMAT (Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF) are both funds - ICBMX is a Energy Equities fund managed by ICON Funds, while FMAT is a Materials fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Materials Index. Over the past 10 years, ICBMX returned 12.87%/yr vs 9.91%/yr for FMAT. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ICBMX charges 1.31%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for FMAT.

Performance

ICBMX vs. FMAT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ICON Natural Resources and Infrastructure Fund (ICBMX) and Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ICBMX achieves a 20.91% return, which is significantly higher than FMAT's 10.13% return. Over the past 10 years, ICBMX has outperformed FMAT with an annualized return of 12.87%, while FMAT has yielded a comparatively lower 9.91% annualized return.

ICBMX

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 20.91%
• 6M: 20.79%
• 1Y: 46.32%
• 3Y*: 23.09%
• 5Y*: 13.88%
• 10Y*: 12.87%

FMAT

• 1D: -2.59%
• 1M: -3.72%
• YTD: 10.13%
• 6M: 13.81%
• 1Y: 19.35%
• 3Y*: 11.18%
• 5Y*: 5.24%
• 10Y*: 9.91%

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

ICBMX vs. FMAT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ICBMX ICON Natural Resources and Infrastructure Fund	20.91%	15.95%	21.25%	11.02%	0.50%	30.63%	5.53%	22.11%	-17.38%	16.93%
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	10.13%	12.11%	0.47%	13.71%	-11.54%	27.45%	19.57%	23.35%	-17.40%	23.51%

Correlation

The correlation between ICBMX and FMAT is 0.79, 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	0.79
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.83
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 25, 2013	0.85

The correlation between ICBMX and FMAT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

ICBMX vs. FMAT — Risk / Return Rank

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

ICBMX

ICBMX Risk / Return Rank: 73
ICBMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
ICBMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
ICBMX Omega Ratio Rank: 52
ICBMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
ICBMX Martin Ratio Rank: 88

FMAT

FMAT Risk / Return Rank: 31
FMAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
FMAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
FMAT Omega Ratio Rank: 29
FMAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
FMAT Martin Ratio Rank: 33

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.

ICBMX vs. FMAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ICON Natural Resources and Infrastructure Fund (ICBMX) and Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT). 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.

	ICBMX	FMAT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.32	1.09	+1.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.31	1.60	+1.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.19	+0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.62	1.44	+3.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.53	4.71	+11.82
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ICBMX vs. FMAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICBMX Sharpe Ratio is 2.32, which is higher than the FMAT Sharpe Ratio of 1.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICBMX and FMAT, 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

	ICBMX	FMAT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.32	1.09	+1.23
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.67	0.27	+0.40
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.58	0.47	+0.11
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.30	0.43	-0.14

Drawdowns

ICBMX vs. FMAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICBMX drawdown since its inception was -63.92%, which is greater than FMAT's maximum drawdown of -41.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICBMX and FMAT.

Drawdown Indicators

	ICBMX	FMAT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-63.92%	-41.11%	-22.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.10%	-13.48%	+3.38%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.49%	-23.17%	-3.32%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.49%	-25.40%	-1.09%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-48.18%	-41.11%	-7.07%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.18%	-6.45%	+5.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.87%	-6.87%	-11.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.82%	4.12%	-1.30%

Volatility

ICBMX vs. FMAT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ICON Natural Resources and Infrastructure Fund (ICBMX) is 4.69%, while Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) has a volatility of 6.14%. This indicates that ICBMX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FMAT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ICBMX	FMAT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.69%	6.14%	-1.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.28%	14.17%	-0.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.09%	17.83%	+2.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.77%	19.63%	+1.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.30%	21.20%	+1.10%

ICBMX vs. FMAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICBMX has a 1.31% expense ratio, which is higher than FMAT's 0.08% expense ratio.

Dividends

ICBMX vs. FMAT - Dividend Comparison

ICBMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.28%, more than FMAT's 1.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	1.46%	1.64%	1.68%	1.71%	2.00%	1.44%	1.73%	1.89%	2.18%	1.53%	1.78%	2.16%
ICBMX ICON Natural Resources and Infrastructure Fund	8.28%	10.01%	17.24%	7.07%	11.07%	1.32%	0.32%	1.55%	21.58%	1.19%	0.53%	7.78%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ICBMX and FMAT in my portfolio?

ICBMX and FMAT have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ICBMX or FMAT?

FMAT has higher volatility (6.14%) compared to ICBMX (4.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ICBMX dropped -63.92% vs FMAT's -41.11%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ICBMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.32 vs 1.09), 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.