PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
NOBL vs. FDRR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

NOBL vs. FDRR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) and Fidelity Dividend ETF for Rising Rates (FDRR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NOBL achieves a 3.51% return, which is significantly lower than FDRR's 10.01% return.


NOBL

1D
-0.17%
1M
1.01%
YTD
3.51%
6M
3.45%
1Y
9.00%
3Y*
8.01%
5Y*
5.03%
10Y*
9.51%

FDRR

1D
-0.99%
1M
6.39%
YTD
10.01%
6M
10.38%
1Y
31.27%
3Y*
21.03%
5Y*
12.34%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

NOBL vs. FDRR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
NOBL
ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF
3.51%6.84%6.72%8.09%-6.52%25.46%8.35%27.39%-3.26%21.02%
FDRR
Fidelity Dividend ETF for Rising Rates
10.01%21.70%20.24%13.66%-9.73%26.06%8.23%26.86%-3.60%19.29%

Correlation

The correlation between NOBL and FDRR is 0.52, 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

0.52

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

0.65

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

0.78

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 16, 2016

0.82

Over the past year, the correlation between NOBL and FDRR has dropped to 0.52 - well below their long-term average of 0.82, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

NOBL vs. FDRR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
NOBL
FDRR

Consumer Defensive

23.5%
4.8%

Industrials

20.3%
8.7%

Financial Services

12.4%
12.0%

Basic Materials

10.9%
2.2%

Healthcare

9.7%
9.4%

Utilities

6.4%
2.4%

Consumer Cyclical

5.1%
8.7%

Real Estate

4.6%
2.9%

Technology

3.6%
34.5%

Energy

3.4%
3.6%

Communication Services

-

10.7%

Consumer Defensive

NOBL
23.5%
FDRR
4.8%

Industrials

NOBL
20.3%
FDRR
8.7%

Financial Services

NOBL
12.4%
FDRR
12.0%

Basic Materials

NOBL
10.9%
FDRR
2.2%

Healthcare

NOBL
9.7%
FDRR
9.4%

Utilities

NOBL
6.4%
FDRR
2.4%

Consumer Cyclical

NOBL
5.1%
FDRR
8.7%

Real Estate

NOBL
4.6%
FDRR
2.9%

Technology

NOBL
3.6%
FDRR
34.5%

Energy

NOBL
3.4%
FDRR
3.6%

Communication Services

NOBL

-

FDRR
10.7%

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

NOBL vs. FDRR — Risk / Return Rank

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

NOBL
NOBL Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
NOBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2222
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NOBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
NOBL Omega Ratio Rank: 2020
Omega Ratio Rank
NOBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 2222
Calmar Ratio Rank
NOBL Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
Martin Ratio Rank

FDRR
FDRR Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
FDRR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FDRR Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
FDRR Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
FDRR Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
FDRR Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
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.

NOBL vs. FDRR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) and Fidelity Dividend ETF for Rising Rates (FDRR). 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.


NOBLFDRRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.05

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.72

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.14

1.52

-0.38

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.99

3.69

-2.70

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.58

15.70

-13.12

NOBL vs. FDRR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NOBL Sharpe Ratio is 0.80, which is lower than the FDRR Sharpe Ratio of 2.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NOBL and FDRR, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


NOBLFDRRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.80

2.85

-2.05

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.35

0.83

-0.48

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.57

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.64

0.81

-0.17

Drawdowns

NOBL vs. FDRR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NOBL drawdown since its inception was -35.43%, roughly equal to the maximum FDRR drawdown of -36.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NOBL and FDRR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


NOBLFDRRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.43%

-36.52%

+1.09%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.11%

-8.52%

-0.59%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.36%

-18.04%

+2.68%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.92%

-20.92%

+3.00%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.43%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.99%

-1.15%

-4.84%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.48%

-4.00%

+0.52%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.50%

2.00%

+1.50%

Volatility

NOBL vs. FDRR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) is 2.36%, while Fidelity Dividend ETF for Rising Rates (FDRR) has a volatility of 3.08%. This indicates that NOBL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FDRR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


NOBLFDRRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.36%

3.08%

-0.72%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.00%

8.31%

-0.31%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.33%

11.04%

+0.29%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.38%

15.00%

-0.62%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.60%

16.88%

-0.28%

NOBL vs. FDRR - Expense Ratio Comparison

NOBL has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than FDRR's 0.29% expense ratio.


Dividends

NOBL vs. FDRR - Dividend Comparison

NOBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.12%, which matches FDRR's 2.10% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FDRR
Fidelity Dividend ETF for Rising Rates
2.10%2.21%2.61%2.93%2.75%2.09%2.85%2.89%3.20%2.89%0.61%0.00%
NOBL
ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF
2.12%2.14%2.05%2.09%1.94%1.89%2.14%1.89%2.37%1.74%2.13%2.02%

Frequently Asked Questions


NOBL and FDRR have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FDRR has higher volatility (3.08%) compared to NOBL (2.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NOBL dropped -35.43% vs FDRR's -36.52%.

On 5-year performance, FDRR leads with 12.34% vs 5.03% for NOBL. On fees, FDRR is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, NOBL has been the lower-risk option at 2.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FDRR has performed better with a 12.34% return vs 5.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FDRR is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for NOBL.

NOBL has the higher dividend yield at 2.12%, compared with 2.10% for FDRR.

NOBL is categorized as Dividend, while FDRR is Large Cap Growth Equities. NOBL tracks S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats Index, while FDRR tracks Fidelity Dividend Index for Rising Rates. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for NOBL and 0.29% for FDRR.

FDRR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.85 vs 0.80), 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 NOBL and FDRR

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