FBND vs. FIGB: A Bond Fund Appraisal

by

FBND vs. FIGB: A Bond Fund Appraisal

Right then. Let’s talk bonds. Not the sort that keep spies thrillingly employed, but the financial kind. Specifically, the Fidelity Investment Grade Bond ETF (FIGB) and the Fidelity Total Bond ETF (FBND). Both, in their own way, are attempting to be the sensible shoes of a portfolio – providing a bit of stability when the market decides to do a jig on a particularly unstable cliff edge. But, as with shoes, one fits better than the other. And, frankly, one has a much larger shoe shop.

We’re looking at funds designed to offer core bond exposure, which, translated from the jargon of the Guild of Financial Alchemists, means a broad, diversified holding of debt. The idea is to balance risk and reward, but let’s be honest, reward often takes a back seat when discussing bonds. Still, someone has to lend money to things. And these funds aim to be the intermediaries. The question is, which one does it with more… panache? Or at least, with a larger pile of assets under management?

Snapshot: Size and Cost (Because Everything Has a Price)

Metric FIGB FBND
Issuer Fidelity Fidelity
Expense Ratio 0.36% 0.36%
1-yr Return (as of 2026-01-09) 3.8% 3.8%
Dividend Yield 4.1% 4.7%
Beta 1.02 0.97
AUM $327.1 million $23.4 billion

Now, the expense ratios are identical. This is… comforting. It suggests a basic level of competence. However, the Assets Under Management (AUM) tell a rather different story. FBND boasts a truly impressive hoard – $23.4 billion. FIGB, by comparison, feels like a particularly well-stocked purse. A larger AUM generally means greater liquidity – easier to buy and sell without unduly influencing the price. It also suggests that more investors have decided FBND is the slightly less terrifying option.1

Performance & Risk: A Gentle Wobble

Metric FIGB FBND
Max Drawdown (4yr) (16.18%) (15.48%)

The Max Drawdown – the largest peak-to-trough decline – is reasonably similar. Both funds experienced a bit of a tumble, but nothing catastrophic. In the grand scheme of things, a few percentage points here or there is hardly worth mentioning… unless, of course, it’s your money. Then it’s a matter of national importance.2

What’s Inside the Vault?

FBND is a veritable empire of bonds, holding a staggering 2,742 different issues. It’s diversified, alright. Its sector allocation leans heavily towards energy (95%) and utilities (5%). Top holdings include Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, and Goldman Sachs – the usual suspects. Each represents less than 1% of the fund’s assets, which is… sensible. It’s like spreading jam thinly on a very large piece of toast. It prevents any single burnt bit from ruining the whole experience.

FIGB, on the other hand, is a more curated collection. Just 180 holdings. It’s like a connoisseur’s collection of rare stamps. More focused, perhaps, but also… a bit more vulnerable if one of those stamps turns out to be a forgery. Top holdings include Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, and Morgan Stanley – again, the usual suspects. But each represents a slightly larger slice of the pie – just over 1.5%.

Both funds wisely avoid leverage, currency hedges, or any other particularly exotic financial instruments. They seem determined to be boringly responsible. Which, in the current climate, is almost revolutionary.

What This Means for Investors (and Their Sanity)

FIGB offers stability and a focus on high-quality bonds. It’s the financial equivalent of a sturdy pair of boots. Reliable, predictable, and unlikely to cause any unexpected adventures. However, its smaller size and lower yield mean you’ll get less bang for your buck. It’s like paying extra for the privilege of being… safe.

FBND, on the other hand, offers broader diversification, a higher yield, and greater liquidity. It’s the financial equivalent of a slightly faster horse. Still reliable, but with a bit more potential for… progress. It’s a good choice for investors who are willing to accept a slightly higher level of risk in exchange for a potentially higher reward.

Ultimately, the choice depends on your individual circumstances and risk tolerance. If you’re the type of person who worries about everything, FIGB might be a better fit. If you’re the type of person who enjoys a bit of a gamble, FBND might be more appealing. Just remember, even the most carefully constructed portfolio can’t protect you from the sheer randomness of the universe.3

1 It is a little-known fact that the Unseen University of Financial Alchemy maintains a department dedicated to predicting fund flows based on the collective anxieties of investors. Their methods are… unconventional.

2 The Guild of Alchemists and Venture Capitalists are currently engaged in a heated debate over the optimal size of a “safe” portfolio. Some argue for complete diversification, while others believe in concentrating investments in a single, incredibly promising (and highly speculative) venture.

3 The Department of Randomness at the University of Ankh-Morpork has published numerous papers on the inherent unpredictability of financial markets. Their findings are consistently ignored by investors.

Read More

2026-01-18 17:54