UTIP.L vs. FTBFX

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

UTIP.L (SPDR Bloomberg US TIPS UCITS ETF) and FTBFX (Fidelity Total Bond Fund) are both funds - UTIP.L is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Gbl Infl Linked US TIPS TR USD, while FTBFX is a Intermediate Core-Plus Bond fund actively managed by Fidelity. UTIP.L is passively managed, while FTBFX is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, UTIP.L returned 41.75%/yr vs 3.26%/yr for FTBFX. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. UTIP.L charges 0.17%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for FTBFX.

Performance

UTIP.L vs. FTBFX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in SPDR Bloomberg US TIPS UCITS ETF (UTIP.L) and Fidelity Total Bond Fund (FTBFX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

UTIP.L is traded in GBP, while FTBFX is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the FTBFX values have been converted to GBP using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UTIP.L achieves a -0.61% return, which is significantly lower than FTBFX's 0.77% return. Over the past 10 years, UTIP.L has outperformed FTBFX with an annualized return of 41.75%, while FTBFX has yielded a comparatively lower 3.26% annualized return.

UTIP.L

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.96%
• YTD: -0.61%
• 6M: -1.42%
• 1Y: 1.23%
• 3Y*: -2.70%
• 5Y*: -2.60%
• 10Y*: 41.75%

FTBFX

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: 0.96%
• YTD: 0.77%
• 6M: -0.30%
• 1Y: 5.88%
• 3Y*: 2.18%
• 5Y*: 1.73%
• 10Y*: 3.26%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

UTIP.L vs. FTBFX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
UTIP.L SPDR Bloomberg US TIPS UCITS ETF	-0.61%	-3.83%	-0.45%	-6.33%	-8.86%	4.03%	279.51%	55.61%	265.06%	56.18%
FTBFX Fidelity Total Bond Fund	0.77%	-0.16%	3.91%	1.89%	-3.30%	0.51%	6.13%	5.71%	5.23%	-4.82%

Correlation

The correlation between UTIP.L and FTBFX is 0.66, 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	0.66
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.72
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.71
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 7, 2015	0.73

The correlation between UTIP.L and FTBFX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

UTIP.L vs. FTBFX — Risk / Return Rank

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

UTIP.L

UTIP.L Risk / Return Rank: 11
UTIP.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 12
UTIP.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
UTIP.L Omega Ratio Rank: 11
UTIP.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
UTIP.L Martin Ratio Rank: 11

FTBFX

FTBFX Risk / Return Rank: 25
FTBFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
FTBFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
FTBFX Omega Ratio Rank: 24
FTBFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
FTBFX Martin Ratio Rank: 23

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.

UTIP.L vs. FTBFX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg US TIPS UCITS ETF (UTIP.L) and Fidelity Total Bond Fund (FTBFX). 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.

	UTIP.L	FTBFX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.17	1.00	-0.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.27	1.52	-1.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.04	1.18	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.19	1.11	-0.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.38	2.94	-2.56
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UTIP.L vs. FTBFX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UTIP.L Sharpe Ratio is 0.17, which is lower than the FTBFX Sharpe Ratio of 1.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UTIP.L and FTBFX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	UTIP.L	FTBFX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.17	1.00	-0.83
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.28	0.20	-0.48
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.35	0.34	+0.01
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.35	0.60	-0.25

Drawdowns

UTIP.L vs. FTBFX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UTIP.L drawdown since its inception was -23.72%, which is greater than FTBFX's maximum drawdown of -14.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UTIP.L and FTBFX.

Drawdown Indicators

	UTIP.L	FTBFX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.72%	-14.41%	-9.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.54%	-5.71%	-0.83%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-10.48%	-8.82%	-1.66%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.38%	-14.05%	-8.33%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-23.72%	-14.41%	-9.31%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-21.46%	-4.12%	-17.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.04%	-5.11%	-3.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.27%	2.15%	+1.12%

Volatility

UTIP.L vs. FTBFX - Volatility Comparison

SPDR Bloomberg US TIPS UCITS ETF (UTIP.L) has a higher volatility of 1.76% compared to Fidelity Total Bond Fund (FTBFX) at 1.46%. This indicates that UTIP.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FTBFX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UTIP.L	FTBFX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.76%	1.46%	+0.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.86%	4.89%	-0.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.14%	6.34%	+0.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.35%	8.58%	+0.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	118.48%	9.47%	+109.01%

UTIP.L vs. FTBFX - Expense Ratio Comparison

UTIP.L has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than FTBFX's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

UTIP.L vs. FTBFX - Dividend Comparison

UTIP.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FTBFX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.36%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FTBFX Fidelity Total Bond Fund	4.36%	4.36%	4.15%	4.15%	2.54%	1.89%	5.22%	3.03%	3.19%	2.97%	3.61%	3.30%
UTIP.L SPDR Bloomberg US TIPS UCITS ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	69.04%	31.90%	67.27%	43.97%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UTIP.L and FTBFX in my portfolio?

UTIP.L and FTBFX have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.