QDIBX vs. CLDAX
Compare and contrast key facts about Fisher Investments Institutional Group Fixed Income Fund for Retirement Plans (QDIBX) and Calvert Core Bond Fund (CLDAX).
QDIBX is managed by T. Rowe Price. It was launched on Dec 13, 2019. CLDAX is managed by Calvert Research and Management. It was launched on Dec 30, 2004.
Performance
QDIBX vs. CLDAX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QDIBX achieves a 0.11% return, which is significantly higher than CLDAX's -0.52% return.
QDIBX
- 1D
- 0.11%
- 1M
- -0.56%
- YTD
- 0.11%
- 6M
- 1.12%
- 1Y
- 3.61%
- 3Y*
- 4.19%
- 5Y*
- 0.39%
- 10Y*
- —
CLDAX
- 1D
- 0.19%
- 1M
- -1.19%
- YTD
- -0.52%
- 6M
- 0.34%
- 1Y
- 3.16%
- 3Y*
- 3.11%
- 5Y*
- -0.12%
- 10Y*
- 3.26%
QDIBX vs. CLDAX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QDIBX Fisher Investments Institutional Group Fixed Income Fund for Retirement Plans | 0.11% | 7.72% | 1.66% | 6.71% | -14.11% | -0.17% | 6.77% | -0.10% |
CLDAX Calvert Core Bond Fund | -0.52% | 7.27% | 1.39% | 5.04% | -13.48% | -2.30% | 14.56% | -0.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between QDIBX and CLDAX is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification — they'll tend to fall together during downturns. For meaningful risk reduction, look for holdings with correlations below 0.5.
QDIBX vs. CLDAX - Expense Ratio Comparison
QDIBX has a 0.03% expense ratio, which is lower than CLDAX's 0.74% expense ratio.
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
QDIBX vs. CLDAX — Risk / Return Rank
QDIBX
CLDAX
QDIBX vs. CLDAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fisher Investments Institutional Group Fixed Income Fund for Retirement Plans (QDIBX) and Calvert Core Bond Fund (CLDAX). 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.
| QDIBX | CLDAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.04 | 0.89 | +0.15 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.51 | 1.27 | +0.24 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.19 | 1.16 | +0.03 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.63 | 1.19 | +0.44 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.69 | 3.62 | +1.07 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| QDIBX | CLDAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.04 | 0.89 | +0.15 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.06 | -0.02 | +0.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.48 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.17 | 0.82 | -0.65 |
Drawdowns
QDIBX vs. CLDAX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QDIBX drawdown since its inception was -19.63%, roughly equal to the maximum CLDAX drawdown of -18.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QDIBX and CLDAX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| QDIBX | CLDAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.63% | -18.88% | -0.75% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.58% | -3.04% | +0.46% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.63% | -18.21% | -1.42% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -18.88% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.65% | -3.93% | +2.28% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.51% | -3.92% | -2.59% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.89% | 1.00% | -0.11% |
Volatility
QDIBX vs. CLDAX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Fisher Investments Institutional Group Fixed Income Fund for Retirement Plans (QDIBX) is 1.46%, while Calvert Core Bond Fund (CLDAX) has a volatility of 1.63%. This indicates that QDIBX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CLDAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| QDIBX | CLDAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.46% | 1.63% | -0.17% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.52% | 2.54% | -0.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.30% | 4.23% | +0.07% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.58% | 5.59% | +0.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.31% | 6.85% | -0.54% |
Dividends
QDIBX vs. CLDAX - Dividend Comparison
QDIBX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.49%, less than CLDAX's 3.89% yield.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QDIBX Fisher Investments Institutional Group Fixed Income Fund for Retirement Plans | 3.49% | 3.50% | 3.55% | 3.65% | 2.51% | 1.80% | 3.25% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CLDAX Calvert Core Bond Fund | 3.89% | 4.24% | 4.16% | 3.17% | 1.80% | 6.08% | 5.22% | 3.04% | 3.63% | 3.02% | 7.02% | 2.85% |