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

Performance

QLTA vs. FBND - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Aaa - A Rated Corporate Bond ETF (QLTA) 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, QLTA achieves a 0.50% return, which is significantly lower than FBND's 0.70% return. Over the past 10 years, QLTA has underperformed FBND with an annualized return of 2.02%, while FBND has yielded a comparatively higher 2.58% annualized return.


QLTA

1D
-0.02%
1M
0.42%
YTD
0.50%
6M
0.45%
1Y
5.60%
3Y*
4.58%
5Y*
0.25%
10Y*
2.02%

FBND

1D
0.09%
1M
0.23%
YTD
0.70%
6M
0.67%
1Y
5.75%
3Y*
4.77%
5Y*
0.94%
10Y*
2.58%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QLTA vs. FBND - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
QLTA
iShares Aaa - A Rated Corporate Bond ETF
0.50%7.36%1.23%7.60%-15.14%-2.32%9.62%12.54%-2.27%5.69%
FBND
Fidelity Total Bond ETF
0.70%7.57%2.13%6.81%-12.54%-0.43%9.41%9.82%-0.57%3.52%

Correlation

The correlation between QLTA and FBND is 0.95, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.95

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

0.95

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

0.94

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

0.87

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

0.83

The correlation between QLTA and FBND shifts across timeframes, from 0.83 (all time) to 0.95 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

QLTA vs. FBND — Risk / Return Rank

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

QLTA
QLTA Risk / Return Rank: 3636
Overall Rank
QLTA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3535
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QLTA Sortino Ratio Rank: 3636
Sortino Ratio Rank
QLTA Omega Ratio Rank: 3333
Omega Ratio Rank
QLTA Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
QLTA Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank

FBND
FBND Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
FBND Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBND Sortino Ratio Rank: 4545
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBND Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
FBND Calmar Ratio Rank: 4141
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.

QLTA vs. FBND - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Aaa - A Rated Corporate Bond ETF (QLTA) 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.


QLTAFBNDDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.29

1.50

-0.21

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.91

2.23

-0.32

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.23

1.26

-0.04

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.91

2.06

-0.15

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

5.74

6.28

-0.54

QLTA vs. FBND - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QLTA Sharpe Ratio is 1.29, which is comparable to the FBND Sharpe Ratio of 1.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QLTA 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


QLTAFBNDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.29

1.50

-0.21

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.04

0.16

-0.13

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.29

0.42

-0.14

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.40

0.45

-0.05

Drawdowns

QLTA vs. FBND - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QLTA drawdown since its inception was -22.27%, which is greater than FBND's maximum drawdown of -17.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QLTA and FBND.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QLTAFBNDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.27%

-17.25%

-5.02%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.81%

-2.66%

-0.15%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-6.66%

-5.94%

-0.72%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.36%

-17.25%

-4.11%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-22.27%

-17.25%

-5.02%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.23%

-1.23%

-2.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.68%

-3.35%

-1.33%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.94%

0.88%

+0.06%

Volatility

QLTA vs. FBND - Volatility Comparison

iShares Aaa - A Rated Corporate Bond ETF (QLTA) has a higher volatility of 1.38% compared to Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND) at 1.28%. This indicates that QLTA'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


QLTAFBNDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.38%

1.28%

+0.10%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.21%

2.76%

+0.45%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.38%

3.86%

+0.52%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.22%

5.92%

+1.30%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.02%

6.10%

+0.92%

QLTA vs. FBND - Expense Ratio Comparison

QLTA has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than FBND's 0.36% expense ratio.


Dividends

QLTA vs. FBND - Dividend Comparison

QLTA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.46%, less than FBND's 4.69% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FBND
Fidelity Total Bond ETF
4.69%4.70%4.73%4.26%3.07%1.86%4.25%2.90%2.93%2.56%2.84%3.26%
QLTA
iShares Aaa - A Rated Corporate Bond ETF
4.46%4.33%4.11%3.39%2.79%1.96%2.31%2.99%3.09%2.67%2.59%2.99%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.95, QLTA and FBND move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

QLTA has higher volatility (1.38%) compared to FBND (1.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QLTA dropped -22.27% vs FBND's -17.25%.

On 10-year performance, FBND leads with 2.58% vs 2.02% for QLTA. On fees, QLTA is cheaper at 0.15% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FBND has performed better with a 2.58% return vs 2.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QLTA is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for FBND.

FBND has the higher dividend yield at 4.69%, compared with 4.46% for QLTA.

QLTA is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while FBND is Intermediate Core-Plus Bond. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for QLTA and 0.36% for FBND.

FBND currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.50 vs 1.29), 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 QLTA 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