MU vs. FLDR

Last updated Jul 21, 2026

MU (Micron Technology, Inc.) is a stock, while FLDR (Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF) is Short-Term Bond fund tracking the Fidelity Low Duration Investment Grade Factor Index. Over the past 5 years, MU returned 62.98%/yr vs 3.71%/yr for FLDR. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions.

Performance

MU vs. FLDR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Micron Technology, Inc. (MU) and Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MU achieves a 203.41% return, which is significantly higher than FLDR's 1.89% return.

MU

• 1D: 1.94%
• 1M: -23.67%
• 6M: 138.72%
• YTD: 203.41%
• 1Y: 657.80%
• 3Y*: 137.11%
• 5Y*: 62.98%
• 10Y*: 52.40%
• ALL TIME*: 17.23%

FLDR

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 0.25%
• 6M: 1.81%
• YTD: 1.89%
• 1Y: 4.48%
• 3Y*: 5.26%
• 5Y*: 3.71%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 3.21%

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

MU vs. FLDR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
MU Micron Technology, Inc.	203.41%	240.24%	-0.96%	71.93%	-45.93%	24.21%	39.79%	69.49%	-47.16%
FLDR Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF	1.89%	5.41%	5.71%	6.32%	-0.33%	-0.18%	2.01%	4.52%	0.84%

Correlation

The correlation between MU and FLDR is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.11
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.03
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2018	-0.02

The correlation between MU and FLDR shifts across timeframes, from -0.02 (all time) to 0.11 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

MU vs. FLDR — Risk / Return Rank

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

MU

MU Risk / Return Rank: 99
MU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
MU Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
MU Omega Ratio Rank: 98
MU Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
MU Martin Ratio Rank: 100

FLDR

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

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.

MU vs. FLDR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Micron Technology, Inc. (MU) and Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR). 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.

	MU	FLDR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	8.69	5.57	+3.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.21	9.28	-4.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.66	2.58	-0.92
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	21.93	9.63	+12.30
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	74.09	65.29	+8.80

MU vs. FLDR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MU Sharpe Ratio is 8.69, which is higher than the FLDR Sharpe Ratio of 5.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MU and FLDR, 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

MU vs. FLDR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MU drawdown since its inception was -98.25%, which is greater than FLDR's maximum drawdown of -12.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MU and FLDR.

Drawdown Indicators

	MU	FLDR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-98.25%	-12.23%	-86.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-30.28%	-0.47%	-29.81%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-57.63%	-0.76%	-56.87%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-57.63%	-2.33%	-55.30%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-57.63%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-28.67%	-0.06%	-28.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-58.05%	-0.35%	-57.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.95%	0.07%	+8.88%

Volatility

MU vs. FLDR - Volatility Comparison

Micron Technology, Inc. (MU) has a higher volatility of 30.97% compared to Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR) at 0.23%. This indicates that MU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLDR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MU	FLDR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	30.97%	0.23%	+30.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	63.14%	0.62%	+62.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	76.55%	0.81%	+75.74%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	55.01%	1.21%	+53.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	50.78%	5.22%	+45.56%

Dividends

MU vs. FLDR - Dividend Comparison

MU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.06%, less than FLDR's 4.33% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FLDR Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF	4.33%	4.66%	5.50%	5.28%	2.09%	0.51%	1.22%	2.69%	1.38%
MU Micron Technology, Inc.	0.06%	0.16%	0.55%	0.54%	0.89%	0.21%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MU and FLDR in my portfolio?

MU and FLDR have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MU or FLDR?

MU has higher volatility (30.97%) compared to FLDR (0.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MU dropped -98.25% vs FLDR's -12.23%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (8.69 vs 5.57), 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.