BGRN vs. DFGP
BGRN (iShares USD Green Bond ETF) and DFGP (Dimensional Global Core Plus Fixed Income ETF) are both Global Bonds funds. BGRN is passively managed, while DFGP is actively managed. Over the past year, BGRN returned 5.19% vs 5.12% for DFGP. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BGRN charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.22%/yr for DFGP.
Performance
BGRN vs. DFGP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BGRN achieves a 0.43% return, which is significantly lower than DFGP's 1.11% return.
BGRN
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- 0.31%
- YTD
- 0.43%
- 6M
- 0.49%
- 1Y
- 5.19%
- 3Y*
- 4.75%
- 5Y*
- 0.54%
- 10Y*
- —
DFGP
- 1D
- -0.23%
- 1M
- 0.77%
- YTD
- 1.11%
- 6M
- 0.81%
- 1Y
- 5.12%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BGRN vs. DFGP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BGRN iShares USD Green Bond ETF | 0.43% | 7.27% | 2.77% | 5.48% |
DFGP Dimensional Global Core Plus Fixed Income ETF | 1.11% | 5.89% | 3.71% | 6.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between BGRN and DFGP is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 9, 2023 | 0.88 |
The correlation between BGRN and DFGP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
BGRN vs. DFGP — Risk / Return Rank
BGRN
DFGP
BGRN vs. DFGP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares USD Green Bond ETF (BGRN) and Dimensional Global Core Plus Fixed Income ETF (DFGP). 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.
| BGRN | DFGP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.46 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.81 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.23 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.34 | 1.59 | +0.75 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.85 | 5.41 | +2.44 |
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
| BGRN | DFGP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.76 | 1.30 | +0.46 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.10 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.45 | 1.44 | -0.99 |
Drawdowns
BGRN vs. DFGP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BGRN drawdown since its inception was -19.16%, which is greater than DFGP's maximum drawdown of -3.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BGRN and DFGP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BGRN | DFGP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.16% | -3.24% | -15.92% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.23% | -3.24% | +1.01% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -4.55% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.73% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.83% | -0.94% | +0.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.79% | -0.78% | -5.01% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.66% | 0.95% | -0.29% |
Volatility
BGRN vs. DFGP - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares USD Green Bond ETF (BGRN) is 1.06%, while Dimensional Global Core Plus Fixed Income ETF (DFGP) has a volatility of 1.65%. This indicates that BGRN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DFGP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BGRN | DFGP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.06% | 1.65% | -0.59% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.24% | 3.25% | -1.01% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.97% | 3.96% | -0.99% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.46% | 4.66% | +0.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.00% | 4.66% | +0.34% |
BGRN vs. DFGP - Expense Ratio Comparison
BGRN has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than DFGP's 0.22% 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
BGRN vs. DFGP - Dividend Comparison
BGRN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.29%, more than DFGP's 3.64% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BGRN iShares USD Green Bond ETF | 4.29% | 4.21% | 4.07% | 3.52% | 2.66% | 0.78% | 1.82% | 3.66% | 0.21% |
DFGP Dimensional Global Core Plus Fixed Income ETF | 3.64% | 3.45% | 4.51% | 0.62% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.90, BGRN and DFGP move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
DFGP has higher volatility (1.65%) compared to BGRN (1.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BGRN dropped -19.16% vs DFGP's -3.24%.
On 1-year performance, BGRN leads with 5.19% vs 5.12% for DFGP. On fees, BGRN is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, BGRN has been the lower-risk option at 1.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, BGRN has performed better with a 5.19% return vs 5.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BGRN is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.22% for DFGP.
BGRN has the higher dividend yield at 4.29%, compared with 3.64% for DFGP.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and Dimensional. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for BGRN and 0.22% for DFGP.
BGRN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.76 vs 1.30), 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 BGRN and DFGP
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