BINC vs. IBHJ

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) and iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHJ).

BINC and IBHJ are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. BINC is an actively managed fund by iShares. It was launched on May 19, 2023. IBHJ is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Bloomberg 2030 Term High Yield and Income Index - Benchmark TR Gross. It was launched on Jun 21, 2023.

Performance

BINC vs. IBHJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) and iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

BINC vs. IBHJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BINC iShares Flexible Income Active ETF	-0.78%	7.57%	5.76%	6.66%
IBHJ iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF	-0.37%	9.28%	7.32%	8.37%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BINC achieves a -0.78% return, which is significantly lower than IBHJ's -0.37% return.

BINC

• 1D: 0.33%
• 1M: -2.11%
• YTD: -0.78%
• 6M: 0.65%
• 1Y: 5.08%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IBHJ

• 1D: 0.85%
• 1M: -0.84%
• YTD: -0.37%
• 6M: 1.09%
• 1Y: 7.44%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BINC vs. IBHJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

BINC has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than IBHJ's 0.35% expense ratio.

BINC

iShares Flexible Income Active ETF

IBHJ

iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF

Return for Risk

BINC vs. IBHJ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BINC

BINC Risk / Return Rank: 84
BINC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
BINC Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
BINC Omega Ratio Rank: 91
BINC Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
BINC Martin Ratio Rank: 79

IBHJ

IBHJ Risk / Return Rank: 71
IBHJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
IBHJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
IBHJ Omega Ratio Rank: 74
IBHJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
IBHJ Martin Ratio Rank: 86

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BINC vs. IBHJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) and iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHJ). 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.

	BINC	IBHJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.74	1.16	+0.58
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.29	1.58	+0.71
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.28	+0.10
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.91	1.83	+0.08
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.93	10.16	-2.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BINC vs. IBHJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BINC Sharpe Ratio is 1.74, which is higher than the IBHJ Sharpe Ratio of 1.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BINC and IBHJ, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BINC	IBHJ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.74	1.16	+0.58
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.28	1.48	+0.80

Correlation

The correlation between BINC and IBHJ is 0.70, 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.

Dividends

BINC vs. IBHJ - Dividend Comparison

BINC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.91%, less than IBHJ's 6.74% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BINC iShares Flexible Income Active ETF	5.91%	5.86%	6.14%	3.13%
IBHJ iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF	6.74%	6.64%	6.87%	3.66%

Drawdowns

BINC vs. IBHJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BINC drawdown since its inception was -2.69%, smaller than the maximum IBHJ drawdown of -4.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BINC and IBHJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	BINC	IBHJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.69%	-4.93%	+2.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.69%	-4.16%	+1.47%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.14%	-1.25%	-0.89%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.33%	-0.65%	+0.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.65%	0.75%	-0.10%

Volatility

BINC vs. IBHJ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) is 1.25%, while iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHJ) has a volatility of 2.41%. This indicates that BINC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IBHJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BINC	IBHJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.25%	2.41%	-1.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.69%	3.18%	-1.49%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.94%	6.45%	-3.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.03%	6.05%	-3.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.03%	6.05%	-3.02%