MOO vs. FLTR
MOO (VanEck Agribusiness ETF) and FLTR (VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MOO is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the MVIS Global Agribusiness Index, while FLTR is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the MVIS US Investment Grade Floating Rate Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, MOO returned 7.00%/yr vs 3.51%/yr for FLTR. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MOO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for FLTR.
Performance
MOO vs. FLTR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MOO achieves a 10.10% return, which is significantly higher than FLTR's 1.91% return. Over the past 10 years, MOO has outperformed FLTR with an annualized return of 7.00%, while FLTR has yielded a comparatively lower 3.51% annualized return.
MOO
- 1D
- 0.48%
- 1M
- -4.21%
- YTD
- 10.10%
- 6M
- 11.54%
- 1Y
- 13.06%
- 3Y*
- 3.07%
- 5Y*
- -0.70%
- 10Y*
- 7.00%
FLTR
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 0.46%
- YTD
- 1.91%
- 6M
- 2.40%
- 1Y
- 5.30%
- 3Y*
- 6.10%
- 5Y*
- 4.49%
- 10Y*
- 3.51%
MOO vs. FLTR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MOO VanEck Agribusiness ETF | 10.10% | 15.61% | -12.43% | -8.57% | -8.10% | 23.99% | 14.59% | 22.29% | -6.03% | 21.75% |
FLTR VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF | 1.91% | 5.22% | 7.38% | 7.41% | 0.74% | 0.55% | 1.44% | 5.70% | 0.30% | 2.80% |
Correlation
The correlation between MOO and FLTR is 0.10, 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 | 0.10 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.11 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.17 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.13 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 27, 2011 | 0.10 |
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
MOO vs. FLTR — Risk / Return Rank
MOO
FLTR
MOO vs. FLTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO) and VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF (FLTR). 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.
| MOO | FLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -5.83 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -11.35 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 3.15 | -1.98 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.55 | 16.96 | -15.41 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.88 | 101.23 | -97.35 |
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
| MOO | FLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.95 | 6.77 | -5.83 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.04 | 2.11 | -2.16 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.39 | 0.70 | -0.32 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.22 | 0.53 | -0.30 |
Drawdowns
MOO vs. FLTR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MOO drawdown since its inception was -69.53%, which is greater than FLTR's maximum drawdown of -17.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MOO and FLTR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MOO | FLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -69.53% | -17.84% | -51.69% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.45% | -0.31% | -8.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.83% | -1.93% | -24.90% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -39.52% | -3.06% | -36.46% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.52% | -17.84% | -21.68% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -17.50% | -0.04% | -17.46% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.97% | -0.67% | -16.30% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.37% | 0.05% | +3.32% |
Volatility
MOO vs. FLTR - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Agribusiness ETF (MOO) has a higher volatility of 4.08% compared to VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF (FLTR) at 0.25%. This indicates that MOO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MOO | FLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.08% | 0.25% | +3.83% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.57% | 0.62% | +9.95% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.88% | 0.79% | +13.09% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.12% | 2.13% | +14.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.19% | 5.00% | +13.19% |
MOO vs. FLTR - Expense Ratio Comparison
MOO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than FLTR's 0.14% expense ratio.
Dividends
MOO vs. FLTR - Dividend Comparison
MOO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.24%, less than FLTR's 4.73% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLTR VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF | 4.73% | 4.97% | 5.93% | 6.07% | 2.29% | 0.63% | 1.49% | 3.05% | 2.67% | 1.69% | 1.16% | 0.71% |
MOO VanEck Agribusiness ETF | 2.24% | 2.47% | 3.41% | 2.93% | 2.15% | 1.17% | 1.10% | 1.26% | 1.69% | 1.44% | 2.14% | 2.89% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MOO and FLTR have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MOO has higher volatility (4.08%) compared to FLTR (0.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MOO dropped -69.53% vs FLTR's -17.84%.
On 10-year performance, MOO leads with 7.00% vs 3.51% for FLTR. On fees, FLTR is cheaper at 0.14% per year. On volatility, FLTR has been the lower-risk option at 0.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, MOO has performed better with a 7.00% return vs 3.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FLTR is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for MOO.
FLTR has the higher dividend yield at 4.73%, compared with 2.24% for MOO.
MOO is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while FLTR is Corporate Bonds. MOO tracks MVIS Global Agribusiness Index, while FLTR tracks MVIS US Investment Grade Floating Rate Index. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for MOO and 0.14% for FLTR.
FLTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.77 vs 0.95), 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 MOO and FLTR
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