BBTR.L vs. CBND.L
BBTR.L (JPM BetaBuilders US Treasury Bond UCITS ETF - USD (acc)) and CBND.L (Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both Government Bonds funds - BBTR.L tracks the J.P. Morgan Government Bond Index United States while CBND.L tracks the FTSE Goldman Sachs China Government Bond Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BBTR.L returned -0.89%/yr vs 2.85%/yr for CBND.L. At a 0.15 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BBTR.L charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.24%/yr for CBND.L.
Performance
BBTR.L vs. CBND.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BBTR.L achieves a -0.46% return, which is significantly lower than CBND.L's 4.87% return.
BBTR.L
- 1D
- 0.30%
- 1M
- -0.33%
- 6M
- -0.53%
- YTD
- -0.46%
- 1Y
- 3.52%
- 3Y*
- 2.77%
- 5Y*
- -0.89%
- 10Y*
- —
CBND.L
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- 0.02%
- 6M
- 4.64%
- YTD
- 4.87%
- 1Y
- 7.44%
- 3Y*
- 5.57%
- 5Y*
- 2.85%
- 10Y*
- —
BBTR.L vs. CBND.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BBTR.L JPM BetaBuilders US Treasury Bond UCITS ETF - USD (acc) | -0.46% | 6.32% | 0.61% | 3.69% | -12.92% | -2.48% | 8.16% | -0.10% |
CBND.L Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 4.87% | 5.04% | 4.67% | 1.28% | -5.17% | 7.61% | 8.70% | 3.08% |
Correlation
The correlation between BBTR.L and CBND.L is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.31 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 22, 2019 | 0.15 |
The correlation between BBTR.L and CBND.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.15 (all time) to 0.31 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
BBTR.L vs. CBND.L — Risk / Return Rank
BBTR.L
CBND.L
BBTR.L vs. CBND.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for JPM BetaBuilders US Treasury Bond UCITS ETF - USD (acc) (BBTR.L) and Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CBND.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.
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.
| BBTR.L | CBND.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.51 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.25 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.15 | 1.47 | -0.31 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.04 | 7.45 | -6.40 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.86 | 18.48 | -15.62 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BBTR.L vs. CBND.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BBTR.L drawdown since its inception was -20.19%, which is greater than CBND.L's maximum drawdown of -11.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BBTR.L and CBND.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BBTR.L | CBND.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -20.19% | -11.48% | -8.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.14% | -0.99% | -2.15% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.66% | -3.66% | -2.00% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.54% | -11.48% | -6.06% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.35% | -0.21% | -8.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.97% | -2.80% | -6.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.15% | 0.40% | +0.75% |
Volatility
BBTR.L vs. CBND.L - Volatility Comparison
JPM BetaBuilders US Treasury Bond UCITS ETF - USD (acc) (BBTR.L) has a higher volatility of 1.00% compared to Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CBND.L) at 0.89%. This indicates that BBTR.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CBND.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BBTR.L | CBND.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.00% | 0.89% | +0.11% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.78% | 2.58% | +0.20% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.73% | 3.11% | +0.62% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.87% | 5.02% | +0.85% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.90% | 4.94% | +0.96% |
BBTR.L vs. CBND.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
BBTR.L has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than CBND.L's 0.24% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
BBTR.L vs. CBND.L - Dividend Comparison
BBTR.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CBND.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.04%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BBTR.L JPM BetaBuilders US Treasury Bond UCITS ETF - USD (acc) | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CBND.L Goldman Sachs Access China Government Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 2.04% | 2.20% | 2.45% | 2.54% | 2.72% | 2.52% | 1.87% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BBTR.L and CBND.L have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BBTR.L is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BBTR.L is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.24% for CBND.L.
BBTR.L tracks J.P. Morgan Government Bond Index United States, while CBND.L tracks FTSE Goldman Sachs China Government Bond Index. They also come from different issuers: JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for BBTR.L and 0.24% for CBND.L.
Find the right allocation for BBTR.L and CBND.L
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