CGCP vs. IMTB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CGCP (Capital Group Core Plus Income ETF) and IMTB (iShares Core 5-10 Year USD Bond ETF) are both Intermediate Core-Plus Bond funds. CGCP is actively managed, while IMTB is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CGCP returned 5.07%/yr vs 4.75%/yr for IMTB. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CGCP charges 0.34%/yr vs 0.06%/yr for IMTB.

Performance

CGCP vs. IMTB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Capital Group Core Plus Income ETF (CGCP) and iShares Core 5-10 Year USD Bond ETF (IMTB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CGCP achieves a 0.33% return, which is significantly higher than IMTB's -0.02% return.

CGCP

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: 0.27%
• YTD: 0.33%
• 6M: 0.37%
• 1Y: 5.84%
• 3Y*: 5.07%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IMTB

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: -0.07%
• YTD: -0.02%
• 6M: 0.07%
• 1Y: 5.97%
• 3Y*: 4.75%
• 5Y*: 0.55%
• 10Y*: —

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

CGCP vs. IMTB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CGCP Capital Group Core Plus Income ETF	0.33%	7.35%	2.95%	7.17%	-9.78%
IMTB iShares Core 5-10 Year USD Bond ETF	-0.02%	8.88%	1.94%	6.10%	-9.38%

Correlation

The correlation between CGCP and IMTB is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2022	0.92

The correlation between CGCP and IMTB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CGCP vs. IMTB — Risk / Return Rank

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

CGCP

CGCP Risk / Return Rank: 45
CGCP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
CGCP Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
CGCP Omega Ratio Rank: 44
CGCP Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
CGCP Martin Ratio Rank: 45

IMTB

IMTB Risk / Return Rank: 42
IMTB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
IMTB Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
IMTB Omega Ratio Rank: 40
IMTB Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
IMTB Martin Ratio Rank: 40

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.

CGCP vs. IMTB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group Core Plus Income ETF (CGCP) and iShares Core 5-10 Year USD Bond ETF (IMTB). 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.

	CGCP	IMTB	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.58	1.48	+0.10
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.36	2.25	+0.10
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.26	+0.02
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.27	2.10	+0.17
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.46	6.51	+0.96
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CGCP vs. IMTB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CGCP Sharpe Ratio is 1.58, which is comparable to the IMTB Sharpe Ratio of 1.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CGCP and IMTB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CGCP	IMTB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.58	1.48	+0.10
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.09	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.26	0.36	-0.10

Drawdowns

CGCP vs. IMTB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CGCP drawdown since its inception was -15.06%, smaller than the maximum IMTB drawdown of -18.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGCP and IMTB.

Drawdown Indicators

	CGCP	IMTB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.06%	-18.15%	+3.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.59%	-2.86%	+0.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-5.37%	-6.80%	+1.43%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-18.11%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.16%	-1.74%	+0.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.93%	-4.13%	-0.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.78%	0.92%	-0.14%

Volatility

CGCP vs. IMTB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Capital Group Core Plus Income ETF (CGCP) is 1.33%, while iShares Core 5-10 Year USD Bond ETF (IMTB) has a volatility of 1.45%. This indicates that CGCP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IMTB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CGCP	IMTB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.33%	1.45%	-0.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.73%	3.02%	-0.29%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.70%	4.05%	-0.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.36%	6.28%	+0.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.36%	5.18%	+1.18%

CGCP vs. IMTB - Expense Ratio Comparison

CGCP has a 0.34% expense ratio, which is higher than IMTB's 0.06% expense ratio.

Dividends

CGCP vs. IMTB - Dividend Comparison

CGCP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.16%, more than IMTB's 4.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
CGCP Capital Group Core Plus Income ETF	5.16%	5.10%	5.17%	4.98%	2.96%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IMTB iShares Core 5-10 Year USD Bond ETF	4.52%	4.40%	4.42%	4.13%	2.90%	2.49%	2.63%	2.91%	3.04%	2.75%	0.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CGCP and IMTB in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, CGCP and IMTB 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.

Which is riskier, CGCP or IMTB?

IMTB has higher volatility (1.45%) compared to CGCP (1.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CGCP dropped -15.06% vs IMTB's -18.15%.

Which ETF is better, CGCP or IMTB?

On 3-year performance, CGCP leads with 5.07% vs 4.75% for IMTB. On fees, IMTB is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, CGCP has been the lower-risk option at 1.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CGCP or IMTB?

Over the 3-year period, CGCP has performed better with a 5.07% return vs 4.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CGCP or IMTB?

IMTB is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.34% for CGCP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CGCP or IMTB?

CGCP has the higher dividend yield at 5.16%, compared with 4.52% for IMTB.

What is the main difference between CGCP and IMTB?

They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.34% for CGCP and 0.06% for IMTB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CGCP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.58 vs 1.48), 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.