XMLV vs. FTBFX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XMLV (Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF) and FTBFX (Fidelity Total Bond Fund) are both funds - XMLV is a Volatility Hedged Equity fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Low Volatility Index, while FTBFX is a Total Bond Market fund managed by Fidelity. Over the past 10 years, XMLV returned 7.60%/yr vs 2.47%/yr for FTBFX. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. XMLV charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for FTBFX.

Performance

XMLV vs. FTBFX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF (XMLV) and Fidelity Total Bond Fund (FTBFX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMLV achieves a 2.54% return, which is significantly higher than FTBFX's 0.57% return. Over the past 10 years, XMLV has outperformed FTBFX with an annualized return of 7.60%, while FTBFX has yielded a comparatively lower 2.47% annualized return.

XMLV

• 1D: -0.36%
• 1M: -2.36%
• YTD: 2.54%
• 6M: 2.22%
• 1Y: 5.54%
• 3Y*: 10.18%
• 5Y*: 5.52%
• 10Y*: 7.60%

FTBFX

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.47%
• YTD: 0.57%
• 6M: 0.40%
• 1Y: 5.75%
• 3Y*: 4.84%
• 5Y*: 0.76%
• 10Y*: 2.47%

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

XMLV vs. FTBFX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XMLV Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF	2.54%	5.55%	17.08%	1.86%	-6.55%	23.00%	-8.42%	23.77%	-0.16%	13.72%
FTBFX Fidelity Total Bond Fund	0.57%	7.50%	2.13%	7.25%	-13.58%	-0.44%	9.34%	9.89%	-0.66%	4.19%

Correlation

The correlation between XMLV and FTBFX is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.30
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.27
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.20
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.11
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 19, 2013	0.07

Over the past year, XMLV and FTBFX have become more correlated (0.30) than their long-term average of 0.07, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

XMLV vs. FTBFX — Risk / Return Rank

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

XMLV

XMLV Risk / Return Rank: 18
XMLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
XMLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
XMLV Omega Ratio Rank: 15
XMLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
XMLV Martin Ratio Rank: 21

FTBFX

FTBFX Risk / Return Rank: 27
FTBFX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
FTBFX Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
FTBFX Omega Ratio Rank: 27
FTBFX Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
FTBFX Martin Ratio Rank: 24

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.

XMLV vs. FTBFX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF (XMLV) 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.

	XMLV	FTBFX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.54	1.49	-0.96
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.83	2.24	-1.41
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.27	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.79	1.99	-1.20
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.66	6.10	-3.44
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XMLV vs. FTBFX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMLV Sharpe Ratio is 0.54, which is lower than the FTBFX Sharpe Ratio of 1.49. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMLV 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

	XMLV	FTBFX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.54	1.49	-0.96
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.38	0.13	+0.25
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.45	0.52	-0.07
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.60	0.93	-0.33

Drawdowns

XMLV vs. FTBFX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMLV drawdown since its inception was -39.86%, which is greater than FTBFX's maximum drawdown of -18.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMLV and FTBFX.

Drawdown Indicators

	XMLV	FTBFX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.86%	-18.25%	-21.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.03%	-2.89%	-4.14%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.80%	-5.82%	-7.98%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.53%	-18.25%	+1.72%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.86%	-18.25%	-21.61%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.89%	-1.31%	-3.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.26%	-2.32%	-1.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.09%	0.94%	+1.15%

Volatility

XMLV vs. FTBFX - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF (XMLV) has a higher volatility of 3.06% compared to Fidelity Total Bond Fund (FTBFX) at 1.40%. This indicates that XMLV'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

	XMLV	FTBFX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.06%	1.40%	+1.66%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.34%	2.80%	+4.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.35%	3.88%	+6.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.46%	5.67%	+8.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.97%	4.73%	+12.24%

XMLV vs. FTBFX - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMLV has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than FTBFX's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

XMLV vs. FTBFX - Dividend Comparison

XMLV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.91%, less than FTBFX's 4.36% yield.

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%
XMLV Invesco S&P MidCap Low Volatility ETF	2.91%	2.87%	2.23%	2.34%	2.05%	1.14%	1.93%	2.02%	2.13%	1.74%	1.72%	1.85%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XMLV and FTBFX in my portfolio?

XMLV and FTBFX have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XMLV or FTBFX?

XMLV has higher volatility (3.06%) compared to FTBFX (1.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMLV dropped -39.86% vs FTBFX's -18.25%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FTBFX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.49 vs 0.54), 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.