IMMR vs. FLDR
IMMR (Immersion Corporation) is a stock, while FLDR (Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF) is Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Fidelity Low Duration Investment Grade Factor Index. Over the past 5 years, IMMR returned -3.35%/yr vs 3.70%/yr for FLDR. At a 0.02 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
IMMR vs. FLDR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IMMR achieves a -2.47% return, which is significantly lower than FLDR's 1.44% return.
IMMR
- 1D
- -6.22%
- 1M
- -0.31%
- YTD
- -2.47%
- 6M
- -2.18%
- 1Y
- -13.11%
- 3Y*
- -1.02%
- 5Y*
- -3.35%
- 10Y*
- 1.17%
FLDR
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.35%
- YTD
- 1.44%
- 6M
- 1.76%
- 1Y
- 4.70%
- 3Y*
- 5.35%
- 5Y*
- 3.70%
- 10Y*
- —
IMMR vs. FLDR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IMMR Immersion Corporation | -2.47% | -18.30% | 26.47% | 3.43% | 23.12% | -49.42% | 51.95% | -17.08% | -46.98% |
FLDR Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF | 1.44% | 5.41% | 5.71% | 6.32% | -0.33% | -0.18% | 2.01% | 4.52% | 0.94% |
Correlation
The correlation between IMMR and FLDR is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.13 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.07 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.06 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 15, 2018 | 0.02 |
The correlation between IMMR and FLDR shifts across timeframes, from 0.02 (all time) to 0.13 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
IMMR vs. FLDR — Risk / Return Rank
IMMR
FLDR
IMMR vs. FLDR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Immersion Corporation (IMMR) and Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR). 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.
| IMMR | FLDR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -6.21 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -10.17 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.97 | 2.73 | -1.76 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.43 | 10.10 | -10.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.79 | 69.31 | -70.09 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IMMR | FLDR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.34 | 5.88 | -6.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.07 | 3.07 | -3.14 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.02 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.05 | 0.61 | -0.66 |
Drawdowns
IMMR vs. FLDR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IMMR drawdown since its inception was -98.66%, which is greater than FLDR's maximum drawdown of -12.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMMR and FLDR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IMMR | FLDR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -98.66% | -12.23% | -86.43% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -30.86% | -0.47% | -30.39% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -56.90% | -0.76% | -56.14% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -56.90% | -2.33% | -54.57% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -74.29% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -89.95% | -0.02% | -89.93% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -88.21% | -0.35% | -87.86% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.67% | 0.07% | +16.60% |
Volatility
IMMR vs. FLDR - Volatility Comparison
Immersion Corporation (IMMR) has a higher volatility of 11.50% compared to Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR) at 0.19%. This indicates that IMMR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLDR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IMMR | FLDR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.50% | 0.19% | +11.31% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 26.47% | 0.58% | +25.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 39.41% | 0.80% | +38.61% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 45.74% | 1.21% | +44.53% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 51.29% | 5.26% | +46.03% |
Dividends
IMMR vs. FLDR - Dividend Comparison
IMMR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.70%, less than FLDR's 4.43% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLDR Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF | 4.43% | 4.66% | 5.50% | 5.28% | 2.09% | 0.51% | 1.22% | 2.69% | 1.38% |
IMMR Immersion Corporation | 3.70% | 5.59% | 2.06% | 3.12% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IMMR and FLDR have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IMMR has higher volatility (11.50%) compared to FLDR (0.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMMR dropped -98.66% vs FLDR's -12.23%.
FLDR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.88 vs -0.34), 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.
Find the right allocation for IMMR and FLDR
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