AFIF vs. GTO
AFIF (Anfield Universal Fixed Income ETF) and GTO (Invesco Total Return Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AFIF is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by Regents Park Funds, while GTO is a Intermediate Core-Plus Bond fund actively managed by Invesco. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, AFIF returned 3.54%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for GTO. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AFIF charges 1.08%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for GTO.
Performance
AFIF vs. GTO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AFIF achieves a 1.38% return, which is significantly higher than GTO's 0.68% return.
AFIF
- 1D
- -0.11%
- 1M
- 0.43%
- YTD
- 1.38%
- 6M
- 1.69%
- 1Y
- 5.22%
- 3Y*
- 7.37%
- 5Y*
- 3.54%
- 10Y*
- —
GTO
- 1D
- -0.15%
- 1M
- 0.49%
- YTD
- 0.68%
- 6M
- 0.69%
- 1Y
- 6.41%
- 3Y*
- 4.86%
- 5Y*
- 0.07%
- 10Y*
- 2.93%
AFIF vs. GTO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AFIF Anfield Universal Fixed Income ETF | 1.38% | 6.56% | 7.06% | 9.73% | -5.38% | -0.50% | 2.14% | 0.41% | -0.27% |
GTO Invesco Total Return Bond ETF | 0.68% | 7.17% | 2.63% | 5.95% | -14.77% | -0.38% | 10.86% | 11.65% | 0.03% |
Correlation
The correlation between AFIF and GTO is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.23 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 19, 2018 | 0.43 |
The correlation between AFIF and GTO shifts across timeframes, from 0.23 (3 years) to 0.43 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
AFIF vs. GTO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
AFIF
GTO
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Energy
AFIF
GTO
Basic Materials
AFIF
-
GTO
Communication Services
AFIF
-
GTO
Consumer Cyclical
AFIF
-
GTO
Consumer Defensive
AFIF
-
GTO
Financial Services
AFIF
-
GTO
Healthcare
AFIF
-
GTO
Industrials
AFIF
-
GTO
Real Estate
AFIF
-
GTO
Technology
AFIF
-
GTO
Utilities
AFIF
-
GTO
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
AFIF vs. GTO — Risk / Return Rank
AFIF
GTO
AFIF vs. GTO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Anfield Universal Fixed Income ETF (AFIF) and Invesco Total Return Bond ETF (GTO). 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.
| AFIF | GTO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.02 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.06 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 1.35 | +0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.22 | 2.36 | +0.86 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.16 | 7.50 | +6.66 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| AFIF | GTO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.90 | 1.88 | +0.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.80 | 0.01 | +0.79 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.53 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.42 | 0.52 | -0.10 |
Drawdowns
AFIF vs. GTO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AFIF drawdown since its inception was -10.29%, smaller than the maximum GTO drawdown of -20.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AFIF and GTO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AFIF | GTO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -10.29% | -20.61% | +10.32% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.63% | -2.73% | +1.10% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -1.79% | -5.98% | +4.19% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -8.85% | -20.61% | +11.76% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -20.61% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.11% | -1.62% | +1.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.23% | -4.80% | +2.57% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.37% | 0.86% | -0.49% |
Volatility
AFIF vs. GTO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Anfield Universal Fixed Income ETF (AFIF) is 0.61%, while Invesco Total Return Bond ETF (GTO) has a volatility of 1.19%. This indicates that AFIF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GTO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AFIF | GTO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.61% | 1.19% | -0.58% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.03% | 2.50% | -0.47% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.76% | 3.43% | -0.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.44% | 5.68% | -1.24% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.27% | 5.58% | +0.69% |
AFIF vs. GTO - Expense Ratio Comparison
AFIF has a 1.08% expense ratio, which is higher than GTO's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
AFIF vs. GTO - Dividend Comparison
AFIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.58%, less than GTO's 4.76% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AFIF Anfield Universal Fixed Income ETF | 3.58% | 3.52% | 5.61% | 5.91% | 3.49% | 1.73% | 1.25% | 2.54% | 0.69% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GTO Invesco Total Return Bond ETF | 4.76% | 4.70% | 4.42% | 4.05% | 3.47% | 1.93% | 4.04% | 2.97% | 5.25% | 2.81% | 2.57% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AFIF and GTO have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GTO has higher volatility (1.19%) compared to AFIF (0.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AFIF dropped -10.29% vs GTO's -20.61%.
On 5-year performance, AFIF leads with 3.54% vs 0.07% for GTO. On fees, GTO is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, AFIF has been the lower-risk option at 0.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, AFIF has performed better with a 3.54% return vs 0.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GTO is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 1.08% for AFIF.
GTO has the higher dividend yield at 4.76%, compared with 3.58% for AFIF.
AFIF is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while GTO is Intermediate Core-Plus Bond. They also come from different issuers: Regents Park Funds and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 1.08% for AFIF and 0.35% for GTO.
AFIF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.90 vs 1.88), 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.
Find the right allocation for AFIF and GTO
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