AGGS vs. BNDS
AGGS (Harbor Disciplined Bond ETF) and BNDS (Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF) are both Intermediate Core-Plus Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, AGGS returned 5.15% vs 11.53% for BNDS. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AGGS charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.81%/yr for BNDS.
Performance
AGGS vs. BNDS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AGGS achieves a 0.50% return, which is significantly lower than BNDS's 4.80% return.
AGGS
- 1D
- -0.22%
- 1M
- 0.78%
- YTD
- 0.50%
- 6M
- 0.65%
- 1Y
- 5.15%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BNDS
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- 0.70%
- YTD
- 4.80%
- 6M
- 4.89%
- 1Y
- 11.53%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AGGS vs. BNDS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
AGGS Harbor Disciplined Bond ETF | 0.50% | 8.62% |
BNDS Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF | 4.80% | 8.45% |
Correlation
The correlation between AGGS and BNDS is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.38 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 15, 2025 | 0.44 |
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
AGGS vs. BNDS — Risk / Return Rank
AGGS
BNDS
AGGS vs. BNDS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harbor Disciplined Bond ETF (AGGS) and Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF (BNDS). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| AGGS | BNDS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.00 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.93 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 1.70 | -0.46 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.82 | 3.36 | -1.54 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.16 | 15.48 | -10.32 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AGGS vs. BNDS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AGGS drawdown since its inception was -4.66%, smaller than the maximum BNDS drawdown of -6.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AGGS and BNDS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AGGS | BNDS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.66% | -6.96% | +2.30% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.84% | -3.45% | +0.61% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.27% | -0.09% | -1.18% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.18% | -0.79% | -0.39% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.00% | 0.75% | +0.25% |
Volatility
AGGS vs. BNDS - Volatility Comparison
Harbor Disciplined Bond ETF (AGGS) has a higher volatility of 0.88% compared to Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF (BNDS) at 0.74%. This indicates that AGGS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BNDS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AGGS | BNDS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.88% | 0.74% | +0.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.73% | 2.72% | +0.01% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.92% | 3.50% | +0.42% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.65% | 5.21% | -0.56% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.65% | 5.21% | -0.56% |
AGGS vs. BNDS - Expense Ratio Comparison
AGGS has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than BNDS's 0.81% expense ratio.
Dividends
AGGS vs. BNDS - Dividend Comparison
AGGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.20%, less than BNDS's 7.93% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
AGGS Harbor Disciplined Bond ETF | 5.20% | 5.43% | 3.38% |
BNDS Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF | 7.93% | 7.98% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AGGS and BNDS have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AGGS has higher volatility (0.88%) compared to BNDS (0.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AGGS dropped -4.66% vs BNDS's -6.96%.
On 1-year performance, BNDS leads with 11.53% vs 5.15% for AGGS. On fees, AGGS is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, BNDS has been the lower-risk option at 0.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, BNDS has performed better with a 11.53% return vs 5.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
AGGS is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.81% for BNDS.
BNDS has the higher dividend yield at 7.93%, compared with 5.20% for AGGS.
They also come from different issuers: Harbor and InfraCap. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for AGGS and 0.81% for BNDS.
BNDS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.32 vs 1.32), 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 AGGS and BNDS
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