PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MBB vs. FLIA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MBB vs. FLIA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MBS Bond ETF (MBB) and Franklin Liberty International Aggregate Bond ETF (FLIA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MBB achieves a 0.73% return, which is significantly lower than FLIA's 1.68% return.


MBB

1D
-0.24%
1M
0.53%
YTD
0.73%
6M
0.86%
1Y
5.95%
3Y*
4.31%
5Y*
0.42%
10Y*
1.29%

FLIA

1D
0.02%
1M
0.83%
YTD
1.68%
6M
1.78%
1Y
2.80%
3Y*
3.51%
5Y*
1.01%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MBB vs. FLIA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
MBB
iShares MBS Bond ETF
0.73%8.38%1.31%5.01%-11.74%-1.43%4.08%6.18%2.04%
FLIA
Franklin Liberty International Aggregate Bond ETF
1.68%2.12%2.42%7.17%-7.68%-1.98%1.37%7.58%-2.32%

Correlation

The correlation between MBB and FLIA is 0.65, 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

0.65

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.63

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.63

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 1, 2018

0.52

The correlation between MBB and FLIA shifts across timeframes, from 0.52 (all time) to 0.65 (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

MBB vs. FLIA — Risk / Return Rank

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

MBB
MBB Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
MBB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MBB Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
MBB Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
MBB Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
MBB Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
Martin Ratio Rank

FLIA
FLIA Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
FLIA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLIA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLIA Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
FLIA Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLIA Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

MBB vs. FLIA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MBS Bond ETF (MBB) and Franklin Liberty International Aggregate Bond ETF (FLIA). 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.


MBBFLIADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.49

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.73

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.15

+0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.03

1.38

+0.65

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.36

3.62

+2.74

MBB vs. FLIA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MBB Sharpe Ratio is 1.34, which is higher than the FLIA Sharpe Ratio of 0.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MBB and FLIA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

MBB vs. FLIA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MBB drawdown since its inception was -17.64%, which is greater than FLIA's maximum drawdown of -11.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MBB and FLIA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MBBFLIADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-17.64%

-11.24%

-6.40%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.94%

-2.04%

-0.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.68%

-2.77%

-4.91%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.19%

-9.42%

-7.77%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-17.64%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.38%

-0.15%

-1.23%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.34%

-3.78%

+1.44%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.94%

0.78%

+0.16%

Volatility

MBB vs. FLIA - Volatility Comparison

iShares MBS Bond ETF (MBB) has a higher volatility of 1.27% compared to Franklin Liberty International Aggregate Bond ETF (FLIA) at 0.64%. This indicates that MBB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLIA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MBBFLIADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.27%

0.64%

+0.63%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.33%

2.50%

+0.83%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.47%

3.32%

+1.15%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.83%

4.42%

+2.41%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.32%

4.70%

+0.62%

MBB vs. FLIA - Expense Ratio Comparison

MBB has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than FLIA's 0.25% 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

MBB vs. FLIA - Dividend Comparison

MBB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.27%, more than FLIA's 2.68% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FLIA
Franklin Liberty International Aggregate Bond ETF
2.68%2.62%2.97%0.93%18.12%2.26%0.43%2.93%1.23%0.00%0.00%0.00%
MBB
iShares MBS Bond ETF
4.27%4.21%3.94%3.40%2.31%1.05%2.10%2.77%2.64%2.23%2.58%2.66%

Frequently Asked Questions


MBB and FLIA have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MBB has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to FLIA (0.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MBB dropped -17.64% vs FLIA's -11.24%.

On 5-year performance, FLIA leads with 1.01% vs 0.42% for MBB. On fees, MBB is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, FLIA has been the lower-risk option at 0.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FLIA has performed better with a 1.01% return vs 0.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MBB is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for FLIA.

MBB has the higher dividend yield at 4.27%, compared with 2.68% for FLIA.

MBB is categorized as Mortgage Backed Securities, while FLIA is International Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.06% for MBB and 0.25% for FLIA.

MBB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.34 vs 0.85), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MBB and FLIA

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