PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BINC vs. UTEN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BINC vs. UTEN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) and US Treasury 10 Year Note ETF (UTEN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BINC achieves a 0.90% return, which is significantly higher than UTEN's -0.69% return.


BINC

1D
-0.12%
1M
0.54%
YTD
0.90%
6M
1.22%
1Y
5.80%
3Y*
7.02%
5Y*
10Y*

UTEN

1D
-0.26%
1M
0.01%
YTD
-0.69%
6M
-1.30%
1Y
4.26%
3Y*
1.86%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BINC vs. UTEN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
BINC
iShares Flexible Income Active ETF
0.90%7.57%5.76%7.08%
UTEN
US Treasury 10 Year Note ETF
-0.69%7.82%-1.67%0.62%

Correlation

The correlation between BINC and UTEN is 0.78, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.78

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 24, 2023

0.75

The correlation between BINC and UTEN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.78 - 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

BINC vs. UTEN — Risk / Return Rank

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

BINC
BINC Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
BINC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BINC Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
BINC Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
BINC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
BINC Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
Martin Ratio Rank

UTEN
UTEN Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
UTEN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
UTEN Sortino Ratio Rank: 2222
Sortino Ratio Rank
UTEN Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
UTEN Calmar Ratio Rank: 2121
Calmar Ratio Rank
UTEN Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
Martin Ratio Rank
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. UTEN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) and US Treasury 10 Year Note ETF (UTEN). 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.


BINCUTENDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.74

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.49

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.51

1.14

+0.37

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.17

0.94

+1.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.53

2.82

+5.71

BINC vs. UTEN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BINC Sharpe Ratio is 2.56, which is higher than the UTEN Sharpe Ratio of 0.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BINC and UTEN, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BINCUTENDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.56

0.82

+1.74

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

2.36

0.01

+2.36

Drawdowns

BINC vs. UTEN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BINC drawdown since its inception was -2.69%, smaller than the maximum UTEN drawdown of -13.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BINC and UTEN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BINCUTENDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-2.69%

-13.36%

+10.67%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.69%

-4.57%

+1.88%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-2.69%

-8.60%

+5.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.49%

-3.05%

+2.56%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.36%

-4.82%

+4.46%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.68%

1.51%

-0.83%

Volatility

BINC vs. UTEN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) is 0.75%, while US Treasury 10 Year Note ETF (UTEN) has a volatility of 1.71%. This indicates that BINC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UTEN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BINCUTENDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.75%

1.71%

-0.96%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.84%

3.65%

-1.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.28%

5.24%

-2.96%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.00%

8.05%

-5.05%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.00%

8.05%

-5.05%

BINC vs. UTEN - Expense Ratio Comparison

BINC has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than UTEN's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

BINC vs. UTEN - Dividend Comparison

BINC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.86%, more than UTEN's 4.05% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
BINC
iShares Flexible Income Active ETF
5.86%5.86%6.14%3.13%0.00%
UTEN
US Treasury 10 Year Note ETF
4.05%4.11%4.13%3.62%1.39%

Frequently Asked Questions


BINC and UTEN have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

UTEN has higher volatility (1.71%) compared to BINC (0.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BINC dropped -2.69% vs UTEN's -13.36%.

On 3-year performance, BINC leads with 7.02% vs 1.86% for UTEN. On fees, UTEN is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, BINC has been the lower-risk option at 0.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, BINC has performed better with a 7.02% return vs 1.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

UTEN is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for BINC.

BINC has the higher dividend yield at 5.86%, compared with 4.05% for UTEN.

BINC is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while UTEN is Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: iShares and US Benchmark Series. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for BINC and 0.15% for UTEN.

BINC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.56 vs 0.82), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BINC and UTEN

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