PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ONEQ vs. FBND
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ONEQ vs. FBND - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF (ONEQ) and Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ONEQ achieves a 16.16% return, which is significantly higher than FBND's 0.50% return. Over the past 10 years, ONEQ has outperformed FBND with an annualized return of 19.68%, while FBND has yielded a comparatively lower 2.56% annualized return.


ONEQ

1D
-0.85%
1M
7.21%
YTD
16.16%
6M
15.18%
1Y
39.62%
3Y*
27.68%
5Y*
15.43%
10Y*
19.68%

FBND

1D
-0.20%
1M
0.31%
YTD
0.50%
6M
0.30%
1Y
5.59%
3Y*
4.70%
5Y*
0.83%
10Y*
2.56%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ONEQ vs. FBND - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ONEQ
Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF
16.16%20.89%29.30%45.73%-32.12%22.11%44.87%38.01%-3.18%29.29%
FBND
Fidelity Total Bond ETF
0.50%7.57%2.13%6.81%-12.54%-0.43%9.41%9.82%-0.57%3.52%

Correlation

The correlation between ONEQ and FBND is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.23

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

0.20

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

0.22

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

0.14

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 10, 2014

0.12

The correlation between ONEQ and FBND shifts across timeframes, from 0.12 (all time) to 0.23 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ONEQ vs. FBND - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ONEQ
FBND

Technology

50.8%

-

Communication Services

16.7%

-

Consumer Cyclical

13.3%

-

Consumer Defensive

5.2%

-

Healthcare

5.1%

-

Financial Services

3.1%
0.2%

Industrials

2.9%
71.4%

Basic Materials

1.0%

-

Utilities

0.9%
27.5%

Real Estate

0.6%

-

Energy

0.6%
1.1%

Technology

ONEQ
50.8%
FBND

-

Communication Services

ONEQ
16.7%
FBND

-

Consumer Cyclical

ONEQ
13.3%
FBND

-

Consumer Defensive

ONEQ
5.2%
FBND

-

Healthcare

ONEQ
5.1%
FBND

-

Financial Services

ONEQ
3.1%
FBND
0.2%

Industrials

ONEQ
2.9%
FBND
71.4%

Basic Materials

ONEQ
1.0%
FBND

-

Utilities

ONEQ
0.9%
FBND
27.5%

Real Estate

ONEQ
0.6%
FBND

-

Energy

ONEQ
0.6%
FBND
1.1%

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

ONEQ vs. FBND — Risk / Return Rank

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

ONEQ
ONEQ Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
ONEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ONEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
ONEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
ONEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
ONEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank

FBND
FBND Risk / Return Rank: 4040
Overall Rank
FBND Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBND Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBND Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
FBND Calmar Ratio Rank: 4242
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBND Martin Ratio Rank: 3939
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.

ONEQ vs. FBND - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF (ONEQ) and Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND). 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.


ONEQFBNDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

1.25

+0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.15

2.11

+1.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.46

6.37

+6.09

ONEQ vs. FBND - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ONEQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.48, which is higher than the FBND Sharpe Ratio of 1.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ONEQ and FBND, 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


ONEQFBNDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.48

1.46

+1.03

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.70

0.14

+0.56

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.91

0.42

+0.49

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.65

0.44

+0.21

Drawdowns

ONEQ vs. FBND - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ONEQ drawdown since its inception was -55.09%, which is greater than FBND's maximum drawdown of -17.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ONEQ and FBND.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ONEQFBNDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-55.09%

-17.25%

-37.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.64%

-2.66%

-9.98%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.09%

-5.94%

-18.15%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.23%

-17.25%

-17.98%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.23%

-17.25%

-17.98%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.85%

-1.43%

+0.58%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.95%

-3.35%

-4.60%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.19%

0.88%

+2.31%

Volatility

ONEQ vs. FBND - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF (ONEQ) has a higher volatility of 4.20% compared to Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) at 1.27%. This indicates that ONEQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FBND based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ONEQFBNDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.20%

1.27%

+2.93%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.96%

2.73%

+9.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.05%

3.86%

+12.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.14%

5.92%

+16.22%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.71%

6.10%

+15.61%

ONEQ vs. FBND - Expense Ratio Comparison

ONEQ has a 0.21% expense ratio, which is lower than FBND's 0.36% expense ratio.


Dividends

ONEQ vs. FBND - Dividend Comparison

ONEQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.67%, less than FBND's 4.70% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FBND
Fidelity Total Bond ETF
4.70%4.70%4.73%4.26%3.07%1.86%4.25%2.90%2.93%2.56%2.84%3.26%
ONEQ
Fidelity Nasdaq Composite Index ETF
0.67%0.54%0.65%0.71%0.97%0.54%0.71%2.51%1.08%0.84%1.12%1.04%

Frequently Asked Questions


ONEQ and FBND have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ONEQ has higher volatility (4.20%) compared to FBND (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ONEQ dropped -55.09% vs FBND's -17.25%.

On 10-year performance, ONEQ leads with 19.68% vs 2.56% for FBND. On fees, ONEQ is cheaper at 0.21% per year. On volatility, FBND has been the lower-risk option at 1.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ONEQ has performed better with a 19.68% return vs 2.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ONEQ is cheaper with a 0.21% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for FBND.

FBND has the higher dividend yield at 4.70%, compared with 0.67% for ONEQ.

ONEQ is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while FBND is Intermediate Core-Plus Bond. Their fees differ too: 0.21% for ONEQ and 0.36% for FBND.

ONEQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.48 vs 1.46), 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 ONEQ and FBND

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