MINT vs. FLDB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MINT (PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF) and FLDB (Fidelity Low Duration Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MINT is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by PIMCO, while FLDB is a Short-Term Bond fund actively managed by Fidelity. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MINT returned 4.67% vs 4.19% for FLDB. At a 0.00 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MINT charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for FLDB.

Performance

MINT vs. FLDB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF (MINT) 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, MINT achieves a 1.81% return, which is significantly higher than FLDB's 1.28% return.

MINT

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.36%
• YTD: 1.81%
• 6M: 2.20%
• 1Y: 4.67%
• 3Y*: 5.41%
• 5Y*: 3.47%
• 10Y*: 2.70%

FLDB

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: 0.19%
• YTD: 1.28%
• 6M: 1.64%
• 1Y: 4.19%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MINT vs. FLDB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MINT PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF	1.81%	4.74%	4.87%
FLDB Fidelity Low Duration Bond ETF	1.28%	4.93%	4.29%

Correlation

The correlation between MINT and FLDB is -0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 27, 2024	0.00

Return for Risk

MINT vs. FLDB — Risk / Return Rank

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

MINT

MINT Risk / Return Rank: 100
MINT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
MINT Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
MINT Omega Ratio Rank: 100
MINT Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
MINT Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

MINT vs. FLDB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF (MINT) 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.

	MINT	FLDB	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	17.09	4.67	+12.42
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	65.54	8.43	+57.11
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	20.53	2.11	+18.42
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	94.30	25.08	+69.22
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	939.26	93.63	+845.62
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MINT vs. FLDB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MINT Sharpe Ratio is 17.09, which is higher than the FLDB Sharpe Ratio of 4.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MINT 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

	MINT	FLDB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.09	4.67	+12.42
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	5.99	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	2.87	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.47	3.56	-1.10

Drawdowns

MINT vs. FLDB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MINT drawdown since its inception was -4.62%, which is greater than FLDB's maximum drawdown of -0.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MINT and FLDB.

Drawdown Indicators

	MINT	FLDB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.62%	-0.49%	-4.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.05%	-0.17%	+0.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.16%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-2.42%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-4.62%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.13%	+0.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.17%	-0.05%	-0.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.00%	0.04%	-0.04%

Volatility

MINT vs. FLDB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF (MINT) is 0.09%, while Fidelity Low Duration Bond ETF (FLDB) has a volatility of 0.34%. This indicates that MINT 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

	MINT	FLDB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.09%	0.34%	-0.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.20%	0.61%	-0.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.27%	0.91%	-0.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.58%	1.31%	-0.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.95%	1.31%	-0.36%

MINT vs. FLDB - Expense Ratio Comparison

MINT has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is higher than FLDB's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

MINT vs. FLDB - Dividend Comparison

MINT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.28%, less than FLDB's 4.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLDB Fidelity Low Duration Bond ETF	4.45%	4.72%	3.58%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MINT PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF	4.28%	4.63%	5.22%	4.91%	1.90%	0.44%	1.15%	2.65%	2.32%	1.61%	1.35%	0.88%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MINT and FLDB in my portfolio?

MINT and FLDB have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MINT or FLDB?

FLDB has higher volatility (0.34%) compared to MINT (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MINT dropped -4.62% vs FLDB's -0.49%.

Which ETF is better, MINT or FLDB?

On 1-year performance, MINT leads with 4.67% vs 4.19% for FLDB. On fees, FLDB is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, MINT has been the lower-risk option at 0.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MINT or FLDB?

Over the 1-year period, MINT has performed better with a 4.67% return vs 4.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MINT or FLDB?

FLDB is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for MINT.

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

FLDB has the higher dividend yield at 4.45%, compared with 4.28% for MINT.

What is the main difference between MINT and FLDB?

MINT is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while FLDB is Short-Term Bond. They also come from different issuers: PIMCO and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for MINT and 0.20% for FLDB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MINT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (17.09 vs 4.67), 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.