AGZ vs. GBF
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Agency Bond ETF (AGZ) and iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF (GBF).
AGZ and GBF are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. AGZ is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Barclays Capital U.S. Agency Bond Index. It was launched on Nov 5, 2008. GBF is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Barclays Capital U.S. Government/Credit Bond Index. It was launched on Jan 11, 2007. Both AGZ and GBF are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: AGZ or GBF.
Key characteristics
| AGZ | GBF | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 2.71% | 1.27% |
| 1Y Return | 5.94% | 7.45% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | -0.19% | -2.61% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 0.86% | -0.33% |
| 10Y Return (Ann) | 1.58% | 1.40% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 1.82 | 1.32 |
| Sortino Ratio | 2.80 | 1.98 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.34 | 1.23 |
| Calmar Ratio | 0.78 | 0.44 |
| Martin Ratio | 8.58 | 4.30 |
| Ulcer Index | 0.68% | 1.71% |
| Daily Std Dev | 3.23% | 5.57% |
| Max Drawdown | -11.01% | -19.67% |
| Current Drawdown | -2.03% | -10.52% |
Correlation
The correlation between AGZ and GBF is 0.67, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Performance
AGZ vs. GBF - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, AGZ achieves a 2.71% return, which is significantly higher than GBF's 1.27% return. Over the past 10 years, AGZ has outperformed GBF with an annualized return of 1.58%, while GBF has yielded a comparatively lower 1.40% annualized return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
AGZ vs. GBF - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both AGZ and GBF have an expense ratio of 0.20%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
AGZ vs. GBF - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Agency Bond ETF (AGZ) and iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF (GBF). 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.
Dividends
AGZ vs. GBF - Dividend Comparison
AGZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.44%, less than GBF's 3.95% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AGZ iShares Agency Bond ETF | 3.44% | 3.14% | 1.57% | 0.96% | 2.25% | 2.32% | 2.15% | 1.58% | 1.52% | 1.30% | 1.33% | 1.19% |
GBF iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF | 3.95% | 3.03% | 2.13% | 1.22% | 1.64% | 2.64% | 2.59% | 2.31% | 2.09% | 2.04% | 2.08% | 2.37% |
Drawdowns
AGZ vs. GBF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AGZ drawdown since its inception was -11.01%, smaller than the maximum GBF drawdown of -19.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AGZ and GBF. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
AGZ vs. GBF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Agency Bond ETF (AGZ) is 0.82%, while iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF (GBF) has a volatility of 1.73%. This indicates that AGZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GBF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.