BGT vs. BND
Compare and contrast key facts about BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust (BGT) and Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND).
BGT is managed by Blackrock. It was launched on Aug 26, 2004. BND is a passively managed fund by Vanguard that tracks the performance of the Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Bond Index. It was launched on Apr 3, 2007.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: BGT or BND.
Correlation
The correlation between BGT and BND is -0.16. This indicates that the assets' prices tend to move in opposite directions. Negative correlation can be particularly beneficial for diversification and risk management, as one asset may offset the losses of the other during market fluctuations.
Performance
BGT vs. BND - Performance Comparison
Key characteristics
BGT:
0.07
BND:
1.03
BGT:
0.43
BND:
1.48
BGT:
1.07
BND:
1.18
BGT:
0.26
BND:
0.43
BGT:
0.90
BND:
2.60
BGT:
4.55%
BND:
2.07%
BGT:
16.69%
BND:
5.31%
BGT:
-58.31%
BND:
-18.84%
BGT:
-6.44%
BND:
-7.42%
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BGT achieves a -2.51% return, which is significantly lower than BND's 2.13% return. Over the past 10 years, BGT has outperformed BND with an annualized return of 6.58%, while BND has yielded a comparatively lower 1.49% annualized return.
BGT
-2.51%
9.17%
-1.77%
1.19%
12.25%
6.58%
BND
2.13%
0.32%
1.30%
5.43%
-0.86%
1.49%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
BGT vs. BND - Expense Ratio Comparison
BGT has a 1.74% expense ratio, which is higher than BND's 0.03% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
BGT vs. BND — Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank
BGT
BND
BGT vs. BND - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust (BGT) and Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND). 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
BGT vs. BND - Dividend Comparison
BGT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.97%, more than BND's 3.76% yield.
| TTM | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BGT BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust | 11.97% | 11.22% | 10.36% | 6.87% | 5.55% | 7.58% | 6.05% | 6.64% | 5.03% | 5.44% | 6.04% | 6.65% |
BND Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF | 3.76% | 3.67% | 3.09% | 2.60% | 1.97% | 2.22% | 2.72% | 2.81% | 2.54% | 2.51% | 2.57% | 2.79% |
Drawdowns
BGT vs. BND - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BGT drawdown since its inception was -58.31%, which is greater than BND's maximum drawdown of -18.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BGT and BND. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
BGT vs. BND - Volatility Comparison
BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust (BGT) has a higher volatility of 7.05% compared to Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND) at 1.73%. This indicates that BGT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BND based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
User Portfolios with BGT or BND
Recent discussions
Filtering portfolio screening columns
Bee Zee
Making constant changes to weights breaks performance numbers
Bee Zee
calculation of performance
Portfolio performance graph for past 1Y (thru 3/13/2025):
GLD=37.82%
IAU=37.97%
IAUM=38.34%
using daily adjusted closing market price (from NASDAQ) integrating the logarithmic daily rate of return between 3/13/2025 to 3/14/2025 to calculate the cumulative rate of return, I calculate
GLD=31.34%
IAU=31.45%
IAUM=31.66%
These ETF's do not pay a dividend, Expense cost is included in the closing price.
The difference in rate of return is about 6%, which is too large. I can send you my calculation (xls) if this would be useful.
What is causing the error?
Marcus Crahan