VBAL.TO vs. FBAL.NEO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

VBAL.TO (Vanguard Balanced ETF Portfolio) and FBAL.NEO (Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, VBAL.TO returned 7.87%/yr vs 10.75%/yr for FBAL.NEO. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. VBAL.TO charges 0.24%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for FBAL.NEO.

Performance

VBAL.TO vs. FBAL.NEO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a CA$10,000 investment in Vanguard Balanced ETF Portfolio (VBAL.TO) and Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF (FBAL.NEO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VBAL.TO achieves a 8.13% return, which is significantly higher than FBAL.NEO's 6.89% return.

VBAL.TO

• 1D: -0.30%
• 1M: 4.26%
• YTD: 8.13%
• 6M: 6.49%
• 1Y: 18.31%
• 3Y*: 13.79%
• 5Y*: 7.87%
• 10Y*: —

FBAL.NEO

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: 2.74%
• YTD: 6.89%
• 6M: 6.75%
• 1Y: 16.29%
• 3Y*: 16.09%
• 5Y*: 10.75%
• 10Y*: —

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

VBAL.TO vs. FBAL.NEO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
VBAL.TO Vanguard Balanced ETF Portfolio	8.13%	11.88%	14.56%	12.43%	-11.44%	8.61%
FBAL.NEO Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF	6.89%	12.92%	19.42%	13.96%	-7.02%	11.50%

Correlation

The correlation between VBAL.TO and FBAL.NEO is 0.90, 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	0.90
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 22, 2021	0.83

The correlation between VBAL.TO and FBAL.NEO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

VBAL.TO vs. FBAL.NEO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	VBAL.TO	FBAL.NEO
Financial Services	20.6%	22.2%
Technology	20.4%	20.6%
Industrials	11.6%	11.3%
Energy	8.6%	4.4%
Basic Materials	8.5%	9.7%
Consumer Cyclical	7.9%	7.7%
Healthcare	6.7%	4.4%
Communication Services	6.1%	4.8%
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	5.5%
Utilities	2.8%	4.6%
Real Estate	2.3%	4.7%

Return for Risk

VBAL.TO vs. FBAL.NEO — Risk / Return Rank

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

VBAL.TO

VBAL.TO Risk / Return Rank: 68
VBAL.TO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
VBAL.TO Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
VBAL.TO Omega Ratio Rank: 71
VBAL.TO Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
VBAL.TO Martin Ratio Rank: 69

FBAL.NEO

FBAL.NEO Risk / Return Rank: 63
FBAL.NEO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
FBAL.NEO Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
FBAL.NEO Omega Ratio Rank: 68
FBAL.NEO Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
FBAL.NEO Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

VBAL.TO vs. FBAL.NEO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Balanced ETF Portfolio (VBAL.TO) and Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF (FBAL.NEO). 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.

	VBAL.TO	FBAL.NEO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.30	2.17	+0.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.30	3.11	+0.18
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.42	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.10	2.71	+0.39
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.17	11.32	+1.85
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

VBAL.TO vs. FBAL.NEO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VBAL.TO Sharpe Ratio is 2.30, which is comparable to the FBAL.NEO Sharpe Ratio of 2.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VBAL.TO and FBAL.NEO, 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

	VBAL.TO	FBAL.NEO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.30	2.17	+0.13
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.92	1.26	-0.34
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.78	1.22	-0.45

Drawdowns

VBAL.TO vs. FBAL.NEO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VBAL.TO drawdown since its inception was -21.19%, which is greater than FBAL.NEO's maximum drawdown of -13.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VBAL.TO and FBAL.NEO.

Drawdown Indicators

	VBAL.TO	FBAL.NEO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.19%	-13.83%	-7.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.93%	-6.04%	+0.11%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.68%	-8.29%	-1.39%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.45%	-13.83%	-2.62%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.30%	-0.45%	+0.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.17%	-2.43%	-0.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.39%	1.44%	-0.05%

Volatility

VBAL.TO vs. FBAL.NEO - Volatility Comparison

Vanguard Balanced ETF Portfolio (VBAL.TO) and Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF (FBAL.NEO) have volatilities of 2.73% and 2.78%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	VBAL.TO	FBAL.NEO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.73%	2.78%	-0.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.59%	6.08%	+0.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.99%	7.54%	+0.45%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.63%	8.58%	+0.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.09%	8.57%	+1.52%

VBAL.TO vs. FBAL.NEO - Expense Ratio Comparison

VBAL.TO has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is lower than FBAL.NEO's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

VBAL.TO vs. FBAL.NEO - Dividend Comparison

VBAL.TO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.05%, more than FBAL.NEO's 1.51% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FBAL.NEO Fidelity All-in-One Balanced ETF	1.51%	1.61%	1.42%	1.71%	4.48%	1.08%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VBAL.TO Vanguard Balanced ETF Portfolio	2.05%	2.21%	2.26%	2.32%	2.16%	1.91%	1.79%	2.20%	1.99%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both VBAL.TO and FBAL.NEO in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, VBAL.TO and FBAL.NEO 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.

Which ETF is better, VBAL.TO or FBAL.NEO?

On fees, VBAL.TO is cheaper at 0.24% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, VBAL.TO or FBAL.NEO?

VBAL.TO is cheaper with a 0.24% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for FBAL.NEO.

What is the main difference between VBAL.TO and FBAL.NEO?

They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for VBAL.TO and 0.40% for FBAL.NEO.