PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NCBVX vs. FIDAX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NCBVX vs. FIDAX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund (NCBVX) and John Hancock Financial Industries Fund (FIDAX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NCBVX achieves a 16.29% return, which is significantly higher than FIDAX's 0.81% return. Over the past 10 years, NCBVX has underperformed FIDAX with an annualized return of 7.98%, while FIDAX has yielded a comparatively higher 10.47% annualized return.


NCBVX

1D
2.05%
1M
4.66%
YTD
16.29%
6M
15.32%
1Y
31.86%
3Y*
16.77%
5Y*
7.81%
10Y*
7.98%

FIDAX

1D
1.40%
1M
3.15%
YTD
0.81%
6M
1.69%
1Y
12.08%
3Y*
18.93%
5Y*
7.07%
10Y*
10.47%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NCBVX vs. FIDAX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
NCBVX
PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund
16.29%11.86%10.49%10.40%-10.18%33.13%-7.31%18.78%-20.51%11.63%
FIDAX
John Hancock Financial Industries Fund
0.81%12.05%30.09%5.01%-14.17%28.80%1.58%31.21%-15.30%11.00%

Correlation

The correlation between NCBVX and FIDAX is 0.76, 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

0.76

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

0.82

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

0.86

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.86

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 19, 1998

0.85

The correlation between NCBVX and FIDAX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

NCBVX vs. FIDAX — Risk / Return Rank

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

NCBVX
NCBVX Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
NCBVX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NCBVX Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
NCBVX Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
NCBVX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
NCBVX Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
Martin Ratio Rank

FIDAX
FIDAX Risk / Return Rank: 1010
Overall Rank
FIDAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1010
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FIDAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 1010
Sortino Ratio Rank
FIDAX Omega Ratio Rank: 1010
Omega Ratio Rank
FIDAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 1010
Calmar Ratio Rank
FIDAX Martin Ratio Rank: 1010
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.

NCBVX vs. FIDAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund (NCBVX) and John Hancock Financial Industries Fund (FIDAX). 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.


NCBVXFIDAXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.69

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.12

+0.29

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.88

0.73

+4.15

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.57

2.04

+15.53

NCBVX vs. FIDAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NCBVX Sharpe Ratio is 2.32, which is higher than the FIDAX Sharpe Ratio of 0.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NCBVX and FIDAX, 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

NCBVX vs. FIDAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NCBVX drawdown since its inception was -60.64%, smaller than the maximum FIDAX drawdown of -70.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NCBVX and FIDAX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NCBVXFIDAXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-60.64%

-70.42%

+9.78%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.31%

-13.82%

+7.51%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.27%

-19.35%

-1.92%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.15%

-30.89%

+7.74%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-57.50%

-42.09%

-15.41%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.15%

-2.62%

+2.47%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.09%

-14.06%

+4.97%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.75%

4.95%

-3.20%

Volatility

NCBVX vs. FIDAX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund (NCBVX) is 3.99%, while John Hancock Financial Industries Fund (FIDAX) has a volatility of 4.49%. This indicates that NCBVX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FIDAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NCBVXFIDAXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.99%

4.49%

-0.50%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.85%

12.56%

-2.71%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.31%

16.18%

-2.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.85%

20.73%

-1.88%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.67%

21.99%

+0.68%

NCBVX vs. FIDAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

NCBVX has a 1.95% expense ratio, which is higher than FIDAX's 1.24% expense ratio.


Dividends

NCBVX vs. FIDAX - Dividend Comparison

NCBVX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.59%, less than FIDAX's 47.80% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FIDAX
John Hancock Financial Industries Fund
47.80%48.19%10.24%1.91%11.22%23.08%5.41%7.56%7.72%6.10%6.01%0.93%
NCBVX
PGIM Quant Solutions Mid-Cap Value Fund
0.59%0.68%1.03%1.59%1.17%0.74%1.60%1.93%13.70%6.69%2.83%7.89%

Frequently Asked Questions


NCBVX and FIDAX have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FIDAX has higher volatility (4.49%) compared to NCBVX (3.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NCBVX dropped -60.64% vs FIDAX's -70.42%.

NCBVX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.32 vs 0.63), 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 NCBVX and FIDAX

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