LIND vs. FMAT

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

LIND (Lindblad Expeditions Holdings, Inc.) is a stock, while FMAT (Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF) is Materials fund tracking the MSCI USA IMI Materials Index. Over the past 10 years, LIND returned 11.53%/yr vs 9.55%/yr for FMAT. Their 0.40 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship.

Performance

LIND vs. FMAT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lindblad Expeditions Holdings, Inc. (LIND) 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, LIND achieves a 105.13% return, which is significantly higher than FMAT's 8.05% return. Over the past 10 years, LIND has outperformed FMAT with an annualized return of 11.53%, while FMAT has yielded a comparatively lower 9.55% annualized return.

LIND

• 1D: -0.70%
• 1M: 12.81%
• 6M: 77.44%
• YTD: 105.13%
• 1Y: 152.17%
• 3Y*: 38.06%
• 5Y*: 16.66%
• 10Y*: 11.53%
• ALL TIME*: 9.73%

FMAT

• 1D: -2.33%
• 1M: -4.27%
• 6M: -0.47%
• YTD: 8.05%
• 1Y: 16.93%
• 3Y*: 7.48%
• 5Y*: 5.78%
• 10Y*: 9.55%
• ALL TIME*: 8.42%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	$2.12M	$3.31M	$3.29M
LIND Lindblad Expeditions Holdings, Inc.	$22.03M	$20.82M	$22.17M

LIND vs. FMAT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
LIND Lindblad Expeditions Holdings, Inc.	105.13%	21.59%	5.24%	46.36%	-50.64%	-8.88%	4.71%	21.47%	37.49%	3.60%
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	8.05%	12.11%	0.47%	13.71%	-11.54%	27.45%	19.57%	23.35%	-17.40%	23.51%

Correlation

The correlation between LIND and FMAT is 0.45, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.45
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.41
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.44
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.41
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 9, 2015	0.40

Return for Risk

LIND vs. FMAT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

LIND

LIND Risk / Return Rank: 96
LIND Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
LIND Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
LIND Omega Ratio Rank: 94
LIND Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
LIND Martin Ratio Rank: 94

FMAT

FMAT Risk / Return Rank: 34
FMAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
FMAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
FMAT Omega Ratio Rank: 32
FMAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
FMAT Martin Ratio Rank: 35

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

LIND vs. FMAT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lindblad Expeditions Holdings, Inc. (LIND) 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.

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.

	LIND	FMAT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.97	0.86	+2.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.71	1.30	+2.41
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.15	+0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.27	1.19	+5.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.76	3.41	+9.35

LIND vs. FMAT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LIND Sharpe Ratio is 2.97, which is higher than the FMAT Sharpe Ratio of 0.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LIND 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.

Drawdowns

LIND vs. FMAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LIND drawdown since its inception was -83.16%, which is greater than FMAT's maximum drawdown of -41.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LIND and FMAT.

Drawdown Indicators

	LIND	FMAT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-83.16%	-41.11%	-42.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.67%	-13.48%	-10.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-46.20%	-23.17%	-23.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-68.75%	-25.40%	-43.35%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-83.16%	-41.11%	-42.05%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.70%	-8.21%	+7.51%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-29.66%	-6.86%	-22.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.61%	4.69%	+6.92%

Volatility

LIND vs. FMAT - Volatility Comparison

Lindblad Expeditions Holdings, Inc. (LIND) has a higher volatility of 11.04% compared to Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF (FMAT) at 5.53%. This indicates that LIND's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FMAT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LIND	FMAT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.04%	5.53%	+5.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	38.83%	15.12%	+23.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	50.03%	18.65%	+31.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	66.23%	19.73%	+46.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	62.31%	21.21%	+41.10%

Dividends

LIND vs. FMAT - Dividend Comparison

LIND has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FMAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.47%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FMAT Fidelity MSCI Materials Index ETF	1.47%	1.64%	1.68%	1.71%	2.00%	1.44%	1.73%	1.89%	2.18%	1.53%	1.78%	2.16%
LIND Lindblad Expeditions Holdings, Inc.	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LIND and FMAT in my portfolio?

LIND and FMAT have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LIND or FMAT?

LIND has higher volatility (11.04%) compared to FMAT (5.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LIND dropped -83.16% vs FMAT's -41.11%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LIND currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.97 vs 0.86), 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.