PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BSCU vs. IBDV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BSCU vs. IBDV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco BulletShares 2030 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCU) and iShares iBonds Dec 2030 Term Corporate ETF (IBDV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BSCU achieves a 0.29% return, which is significantly higher than IBDV's 0.25% return.


BSCU

1D
-0.06%
1M
0.30%
YTD
0.29%
6M
0.46%
1Y
4.40%
3Y*
5.55%
5Y*
0.66%
10Y*

IBDV

1D
-0.16%
1M
0.26%
YTD
0.25%
6M
0.39%
1Y
4.33%
3Y*
5.61%
5Y*
0.77%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BSCU vs. IBDV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
BSCU
Invesco BulletShares 2030 Corporate Bond ETF
0.29%8.24%3.12%8.66%-15.08%-3.02%1.43%
IBDV
iShares iBonds Dec 2030 Term Corporate ETF
0.25%8.19%3.42%8.51%-14.67%-2.64%1.99%

Correlation

The correlation between BSCU and IBDV is 0.95 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


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

0.95

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

0.96

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.95

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 17, 2020

0.95

The correlation between BSCU and IBDV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.96 - 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

BSCU vs. IBDV — Risk / Return Rank

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

BSCU
BSCU Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
BSCU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BSCU Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
BSCU Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
BSCU Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
BSCU Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank

IBDV
IBDV Risk / Return Rank: 4545
Overall Rank
IBDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4444
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBDV Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
IBDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBDV Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
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.

BSCU vs. IBDV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco BulletShares 2030 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCU) and iShares iBonds Dec 2030 Term Corporate ETF (IBDV). 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.


BSCUIBDVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.05

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.27

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.13

2.10

+0.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.94

6.93

+0.01

BSCU vs. IBDV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BSCU Sharpe Ratio is 1.50, which is comparable to the IBDV Sharpe Ratio of 1.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BSCU and IBDV, 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...

Drawdowns

BSCU vs. IBDV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BSCU drawdown since its inception was -22.34%, roughly equal to the maximum IBDV drawdown of -21.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSCU and IBDV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BSCUIBDVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-22.34%

-21.85%

-0.49%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.07%

-2.07%

0.00%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.66%

-5.64%

-0.02%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.74%

-21.54%

-0.20%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.94%

-0.97%

+0.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.99%

-7.16%

-0.83%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.63%

0.63%

0.00%

Volatility

BSCU vs. IBDV - Volatility Comparison

Invesco BulletShares 2030 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCU) and iShares iBonds Dec 2030 Term Corporate ETF (IBDV) have volatilities of 0.89% and 0.87%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BSCUIBDVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.89%

0.87%

+0.02%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.17%

2.06%

+0.11%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.96%

2.89%

+0.07%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.61%

6.43%

+0.18%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.45%

6.25%

+0.20%

BSCU vs. IBDV - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BSCU and IBDV have an expense ratio of 0.10%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

BSCU vs. IBDV - Dividend Comparison

BSCU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.03%, more than IBDV's 4.60% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
BSCU
Invesco BulletShares 2030 Corporate Bond ETF
5.03%4.56%4.70%4.07%3.06%1.93%0.33%
IBDV
iShares iBonds Dec 2030 Term Corporate ETF
4.60%4.57%4.69%4.09%3.02%1.99%0.90%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.95, BSCU and IBDV 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.

BSCU has higher volatility (0.89%) compared to IBDV (0.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BSCU dropped -22.34% vs IBDV's -21.85%.

On 5-year performance, IBDV leads with 0.77% vs 0.66% for BSCU. Both ETFs have the same 0.10% expense ratio. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, IBDV has performed better with a 0.77% return vs 0.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BSCU and IBDV have the same expense ratio: 0.10% per year.

BSCU has the higher dividend yield at 5.03%, compared with 4.60% for IBDV.

BSCU tracks NASDAQ BulletShares USD Corporate Bond 2030 Index, while IBDV tracks Bloomberg December 2030 Maturity Corporate Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares.

IBDV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.51 vs 1.50), 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 BSCU and IBDV

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