AGAC.AS vs. IBTA.L

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AGAC.AS (iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and IBTA.L (iShares USD Treasury Bond 1-3yr UCITS ETF (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - AGAC.AS is a Global Bonds fund tracking the BBG Global Aggregate Index (USD), while IBTA.L is a Government Bonds fund tracking the ICE US Treasury 1-3 Year Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, AGAC.AS returned 2.59% vs 3.45% for IBTA.L. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AGAC.AS charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for IBTA.L.

Performance

AGAC.AS vs. IBTA.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (AGAC.AS) and iShares USD Treasury Bond 1-3yr UCITS ETF (Acc) (IBTA.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AGAC.AS achieves a -0.21% return, which is significantly lower than IBTA.L's 0.32% return.

AGAC.AS

• 1D: -0.44%
• 1M: -0.04%
• YTD: -0.21%
• 6M: 0.16%
• 1Y: 2.59%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IBTA.L

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: -0.03%
• YTD: 0.32%
• 6M: 0.82%
• 1Y: 3.45%
• 3Y*: 4.17%
• 5Y*: 1.84%
• 10Y*: —

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

AGAC.AS vs. IBTA.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
AGAC.AS iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)	-0.21%	7.96%	1.86%
IBTA.L iShares USD Treasury Bond 1-3yr UCITS ETF (Acc)	0.32%	5.30%	3.71%

Correlation

The correlation between AGAC.AS and IBTA.L is 0.65, 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	0.65
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 13, 2024	0.65

The correlation between AGAC.AS and IBTA.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

AGAC.AS vs. IBTA.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

AGAC.AS

AGAC.AS Risk / Return Rank: 17
AGAC.AS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
AGAC.AS Sortino Ratio Rank: 16
AGAC.AS Omega Ratio Rank: 16
AGAC.AS Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
AGAC.AS Martin Ratio Rank: 19

IBTA.L

IBTA.L Risk / Return Rank: 87
IBTA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
IBTA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
IBTA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 90
IBTA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
IBTA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

AGAC.AS vs. IBTA.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (AGAC.AS) and iShares USD Treasury Bond 1-3yr UCITS ETF (Acc) (IBTA.L). 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.

	AGAC.AS	IBTA.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.51	2.82	-2.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.79	4.64	-3.85
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.59	-0.50
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.75	4.65	-3.90
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.00	17.57	-15.57
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AGAC.AS vs. IBTA.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AGAC.AS Sharpe Ratio is 0.51, which is lower than the IBTA.L Sharpe Ratio of 2.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AGAC.AS and IBTA.L, 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

	AGAC.AS	IBTA.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.51	2.82	-2.31
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.92	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.83	1.08	-0.24

Drawdowns

AGAC.AS vs. IBTA.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AGAC.AS drawdown since its inception was -6.87%, which is greater than IBTA.L's maximum drawdown of -5.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AGAC.AS and IBTA.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	AGAC.AS	IBTA.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.87%	-5.80%	-1.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.39%	-0.74%	-2.65%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-0.89%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-5.70%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.07%	-0.27%	-1.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.60%	-0.97%	-0.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.29%	0.20%	+1.09%

Volatility

AGAC.AS vs. IBTA.L - Volatility Comparison

iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (AGAC.AS) has a higher volatility of 2.02% compared to iShares USD Treasury Bond 1-3yr UCITS ETF (Acc) (IBTA.L) at 0.41%. This indicates that AGAC.AS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBTA.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AGAC.AS	IBTA.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.02%	0.41%	+1.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.91%	0.85%	+3.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.04%	1.22%	+3.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.48%	2.00%	+3.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.48%	1.76%	+3.72%

AGAC.AS vs. IBTA.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

AGAC.AS has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is higher than IBTA.L's 0.07% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

AGAC.AS vs. IBTA.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither AGAC.AS nor IBTA.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AGAC.AS and IBTA.L in my portfolio?

AGAC.AS and IBTA.L have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, AGAC.AS or IBTA.L?

On fees, IBTA.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, AGAC.AS or IBTA.L?

IBTA.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.10% for AGAC.AS.

What is the main difference between AGAC.AS and IBTA.L?

AGAC.AS is categorized as Global Bonds, while IBTA.L is Government Bonds. AGAC.AS tracks BBG Global Aggregate Index (USD), while IBTA.L tracks ICE US Treasury 1-3 Year Index. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for AGAC.AS and 0.07% for IBTA.L.