IMCB vs. FLDZ

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

IMCB (iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF) and FLDZ (RiverNorth Patriot ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. IMCB is passively managed, while FLDZ is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, IMCB returned 17.94%/yr vs 13.26%/yr for FLDZ. Their correlation of 0.95 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IMCB charges 0.04%/yr vs 0.77%/yr for FLDZ.

Performance

IMCB vs. FLDZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB) and RiverNorth Patriot ETF (FLDZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMCB achieves a 15.00% return, which is significantly higher than FLDZ's 4.53% return.

IMCB

• 1D: 1.17%
• 1M: 4.93%
• YTD: 15.00%
• 6M: 15.90%
• 1Y: 24.63%
• 3Y*: 17.94%
• 5Y*: 9.00%
• 10Y*: 11.35%

FLDZ

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: -1.15%
• YTD: 4.53%
• 6M: 4.21%
• 1Y: 9.09%
• 3Y*: 13.26%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IMCB vs. FLDZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
IMCB iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF	15.00%	10.25%	15.10%	16.37%	-15.82%
FLDZ RiverNorth Patriot ETF	4.53%	6.66%	15.99%	12.15%	-11.99%

Correlation

The correlation between IMCB and FLDZ is 0.90, 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	0.90
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 4, 2022	0.95

The correlation between IMCB and FLDZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

IMCB vs. FLDZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IMCB	FLDZ
Technology	21.3%	3.4%
Industrials	19.0%	12.1%
Financial Services	12.0%	15.1%
Consumer Cyclical	9.0%	14.8%
Healthcare	7.9%	11.7%
Energy	7.4%	11.5%
Utilities	6.2%	11.9%
Basic Materials	5.3%	1.6%
Consumer Defensive	5.1%	4.8%
Real Estate	4.3%	8.3%
Communication Services	2.3%	4.6%

Return for Risk

IMCB vs. FLDZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMCB

IMCB Risk / Return Rank: 59
IMCB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
IMCB Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
IMCB Omega Ratio Rank: 54
IMCB Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
IMCB Martin Ratio Rank: 66

FLDZ

FLDZ Risk / Return Rank: 25
FLDZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
FLDZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
FLDZ Omega Ratio Rank: 22
FLDZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
FLDZ Martin Ratio Rank: 30

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.

IMCB vs. FLDZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB) and RiverNorth Patriot ETF (FLDZ). 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.

	IMCB	FLDZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.94	0.81	+1.13
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.75	1.22	+1.52
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.14	+0.19
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.08	1.45	+1.64
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	12.25	4.42	+7.83
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IMCB vs. FLDZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMCB Sharpe Ratio is 1.94, which is higher than the FLDZ Sharpe Ratio of 0.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMCB and FLDZ, 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

	IMCB	FLDZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.94	0.81	+1.13
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.51	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.58	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.50	0.34	+0.17

Drawdowns

IMCB vs. FLDZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMCB drawdown since its inception was -58.80%, which is greater than FLDZ's maximum drawdown of -19.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMCB and FLDZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	IMCB	FLDZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.80%	-19.54%	-39.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.05%	-6.25%	-1.80%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.80%	-17.43%	-2.37%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.15%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-40.99%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.52%	+1.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.73%	-5.99%	-1.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.03%	2.05%	-0.02%

Volatility

IMCB vs. FLDZ - Volatility Comparison

iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB) has a higher volatility of 3.37% compared to RiverNorth Patriot ETF (FLDZ) at 2.62%. This indicates that IMCB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLDZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IMCB	FLDZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.37%	2.62%	+0.75%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.61%	7.65%	+1.96%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.75%	11.31%	+1.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.57%	16.92%	+0.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.65%	16.92%	+2.73%

IMCB vs. FLDZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMCB has a 0.04% expense ratio, which is lower than FLDZ's 0.77% expense ratio.

Dividends

IMCB vs. FLDZ - Dividend Comparison

IMCB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.21%, less than FLDZ's 1.47% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLDZ RiverNorth Patriot ETF	1.47%	1.54%	1.17%	1.39%	1.52%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IMCB iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF	1.21%	1.42%	1.43%	1.55%	1.70%	1.08%	1.12%	1.32%	1.80%	1.31%	1.79%	1.47%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IMCB and FLDZ in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, IMCB and FLDZ 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.

Which is riskier, IMCB or FLDZ?

IMCB has higher volatility (3.37%) compared to FLDZ (2.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMCB dropped -58.80% vs FLDZ's -19.54%.

Which ETF is better, IMCB or FLDZ?

On 3-year performance, IMCB leads with 17.94% vs 13.26% for FLDZ. On fees, IMCB is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, FLDZ has been the lower-risk option at 2.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IMCB or FLDZ?

Over the 3-year period, IMCB has performed better with a 17.94% return vs 13.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IMCB or FLDZ?

IMCB is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for FLDZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IMCB or FLDZ?

FLDZ has the higher dividend yield at 1.47%, compared with 1.21% for IMCB.

What is the main difference between IMCB and FLDZ?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and RiverNorth. Their fees differ too: 0.04% for IMCB and 0.77% for FLDZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IMCB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.94 vs 0.81), 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.