LODI vs. FLDB

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

LODI (AAM SLC Low Duration Income ETF) and FLDB (Fidelity Low Duration Bond ETF) are both Short-Term Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LODI returned 5.83% vs 4.20% for FLDB. At a 0.21 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LODI charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for FLDB.

Performance

LODI vs. FLDB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AAM SLC Low Duration Income ETF (LODI) and Fidelity Low Duration Bond ETF (FLDB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LODI achieves a 1.87% return, which is significantly higher than FLDB's 1.36% return.

LODI

• 1D: -0.00%
• 1M: 0.45%
• YTD: 1.87%
• 6M: 2.30%
• 1Y: 5.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLDB

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 0.31%
• YTD: 1.36%
• 6M: 1.82%
• 1Y: 4.20%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LODI vs. FLDB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
LODI AAM SLC Low Duration Income ETF	1.87%	6.04%	0.26%
FLDB Fidelity Low Duration Bond ETF	1.36%	4.93%	0.34%

Correlation

The correlation between LODI and FLDB is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 5, 2024	0.21

Return for Risk

LODI vs. FLDB — Risk / Return Rank

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

LODI

LODI Risk / Return Rank: 88
LODI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
LODI Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
LODI Omega Ratio Rank: 92
LODI Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
LODI Martin Ratio Rank: 90

FLDB

FLDB Risk / Return Rank: 98
FLDB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
FLDB Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
FLDB Omega Ratio Rank: 98
FLDB Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
FLDB Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

LODI vs. FLDB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AAM SLC Low Duration Income ETF (LODI) and Fidelity Low Duration Bond ETF (FLDB). 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.

	LODI	FLDB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.44	4.68	-2.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.69	8.45	-4.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.61	2.11	-0.50
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.82	25.15	-17.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.31	93.64	-73.33
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LODI vs. FLDB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LODI Sharpe Ratio is 2.44, which is lower than the FLDB Sharpe Ratio of 4.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LODI and FLDB, 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

	LODI	FLDB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.44	4.68	-2.24
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.37	3.59	-1.22

Drawdowns

LODI vs. FLDB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LODI drawdown since its inception was -1.01%, which is greater than FLDB's maximum drawdown of -0.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LODI and FLDB.

Drawdown Indicators

	LODI	FLDB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.01%	-0.49%	-0.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.75%	-0.17%	-0.58%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.04%	-0.05%	+0.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.21%	-0.05%	-0.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.29%	0.04%	+0.25%

Volatility

LODI vs. FLDB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AAM SLC Low Duration Income ETF (LODI) is 0.31%, while Fidelity Low Duration Bond ETF (FLDB) has a volatility of 0.34%. This indicates that LODI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLDB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LODI	FLDB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.31%	0.34%	-0.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.08%	0.62%	+0.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.40%	0.90%	+1.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.34%	1.31%	+1.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.34%	1.31%	+1.03%

LODI vs. FLDB - Expense Ratio Comparison

LODI has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than FLDB's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

LODI vs. FLDB - Dividend Comparison

LODI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.96%, more than FLDB's 4.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FLDB Fidelity Low Duration Bond ETF	4.45%	4.72%	3.58%
LODI AAM SLC Low Duration Income ETF	4.96%	5.11%	0.38%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LODI and FLDB in my portfolio?

LODI and FLDB have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LODI or FLDB?

FLDB has higher volatility (0.34%) compared to LODI (0.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LODI dropped -1.01% vs FLDB's -0.49%.

Which ETF is better, LODI or FLDB?

On 1-year performance, LODI leads with 5.83% vs 4.20% for FLDB. On fees, LODI is cheaper at 0.15% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LODI or FLDB?

Over the 1-year period, LODI has performed better with a 5.83% return vs 4.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LODI or FLDB?

LODI is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for FLDB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LODI or FLDB?

LODI has the higher dividend yield at 4.96%, compared with 4.45% for FLDB.

What is the main difference between LODI and FLDB?

They also come from different issuers: AAM and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for LODI and 0.20% for FLDB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLDB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.68 vs 2.44), 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.