PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NFLT vs. UTES
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NFLT vs. UTES - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Virtus Newfleet Multi-Sector Bond ETF (NFLT) and Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF (UTES). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NFLT achieves a 1.48% return, which is significantly higher than UTES's -1.07% return. Over the past 10 years, NFLT has underperformed UTES with an annualized return of 3.83%, while UTES has yielded a comparatively higher 11.78% annualized return.


NFLT

1D
0.00%
1M
-0.58%
6M
0.73%
YTD
1.48%
1Y
4.92%
3Y*
6.96%
5Y*
2.99%
10Y*
3.83%
ALL TIME*
4.02%

UTES

1D
-0.03%
1M
-4.28%
6M
0.59%
YTD
-1.07%
1Y
-3.98%
3Y*
21.10%
5Y*
14.97%
10Y*
11.78%
ALL TIME*
13.50%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$2.33M$1.94M$2.09M
$11.16M$10.04M$13.72M

NFLT vs. UTES - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
NFLT
Virtus Newfleet Multi-Sector Bond ETF
1.48%8.77%6.05%9.16%-9.49%1.18%8.02%10.13%-2.68%6.30%
UTES
Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF
-1.07%25.71%45.35%-2.46%0.80%20.74%-0.30%25.48%5.14%14.21%

Correlation

The correlation between NFLT and UTES is 0.24, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.24

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.21

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.24

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.20

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2015

0.19

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

NFLT vs. UTES — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

NFLT
NFLT Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
NFLT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NFLT Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
NFLT Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
NFLT Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
NFLT Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
Martin Ratio Rank

UTES
UTES Risk / Return Rank: 77
Overall Rank
UTES Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UTES Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
Sortino Ratio Rank
UTES Omega Ratio Rank: 88
Omega Ratio Rank
UTES Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
Calmar Ratio Rank
UTES Martin Ratio Rank: 77
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

NFLT vs. UTES - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Virtus Newfleet Multi-Sector Bond ETF (NFLT) and Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF (UTES). 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.


NFLTUTESDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.52

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.07

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

0.98

+0.26

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.22

-0.31

+2.53

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.06

-0.65

+9.71

NFLT vs. UTES - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NFLT Sharpe Ratio is 1.32, which is higher than the UTES Sharpe Ratio of -0.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NFLT and UTES, 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

NFLT vs. UTES - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NFLT drawdown since its inception was -15.17%, smaller than the maximum UTES drawdown of -35.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NFLT and UTES.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NFLTUTESDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-15.17%

-35.39%

+20.22%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.42%

-13.88%

+11.46%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-3.15%

-17.62%

+14.47%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-13.42%

-20.40%

+6.98%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-15.17%

-35.39%

+20.22%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.92%

-10.30%

+9.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.08%

-5.54%

+3.46%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.59%

6.72%

-6.13%

Volatility

NFLT vs. UTES - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Virtus Newfleet Multi-Sector Bond ETF (NFLT) is 0.97%, while Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF (UTES) has a volatility of 5.50%. This indicates that NFLT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UTES based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NFLTUTESDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.97%

5.50%

-4.53%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.19%

16.19%

-13.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.06%

21.39%

-17.33%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.49%

20.74%

-16.25%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.92%

20.26%

-15.34%

NFLT vs. UTES - Expense Ratio Comparison

NFLT has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than UTES's 0.49% expense ratio.


Dividends

NFLT vs. UTES - Dividend Comparison

NFLT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.48%, more than UTES's 1.53% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
NFLT
Virtus Newfleet Multi-Sector Bond ETF
5.48%5.74%5.76%6.02%4.16%3.41%3.63%4.33%4.81%6.23%5.30%0.67%
UTES
Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF
1.53%1.42%1.51%2.44%2.13%1.94%2.09%1.84%2.09%3.44%3.53%0.61%

Frequently Asked Questions


NFLT and UTES have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

UTES has higher volatility (5.50%) compared to NFLT (0.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NFLT dropped -15.17% vs UTES's -35.39%.

On 10-year performance, UTES leads with 11.78% vs 3.83% for NFLT. On fees, UTES is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, NFLT has been the lower-risk option at 0.97%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, UTES has performed better with a 11.78% return vs 3.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

UTES is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for NFLT.

NFLT has the higher dividend yield at 5.48%, compared with 1.53% for UTES.

NFLT is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while UTES is Utilities Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for NFLT and 0.49% for UTES.

NFLT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.32 vs -0.20), 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 NFLT and UTES

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