CSHP vs. TLT
CSHP (iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF) and TLT (iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CSHP is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares, while TLT is a Government Bonds fund tracking the ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index. CSHP is actively managed, while TLT is passively managed. Over the past year, CSHP returned 3.96% vs 4.93% for TLT. At a correlation of -0.18, they often move in opposite directions. CSHP charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for TLT.
Performance
CSHP vs. TLT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CSHP achieves a 1.63% return, which is significantly higher than TLT's -0.27% return.
CSHP
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.27%
- YTD
- 1.63%
- 6M
- 1.93%
- 1Y
- 3.96%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TLT
- 1D
- -0.40%
- 1M
- 0.81%
- YTD
- -0.27%
- 6M
- -2.02%
- 1Y
- 4.93%
- 3Y*
- -1.80%
- 5Y*
- -6.31%
- 10Y*
- -1.66%
CSHP vs. TLT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF | 1.63% | 4.10% | 2.24% |
TLT iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF | -0.27% | 4.25% | -4.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between CSHP and TLT is -0.21, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.21 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 19, 2024 | -0.18 |
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
CSHP vs. TLT — Risk / Return Rank
CSHP
TLT
CSHP vs. TLT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) and iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT). 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.
| CSHP | TLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +11.40 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +30.46 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 7.44 | 1.09 | +6.35 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 65.71 | 0.65 | +65.05 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 432.16 | 1.63 | +430.53 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CSHP | TLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.91 | 0.51 | +11.40 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | -0.40 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | -0.11 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 10.75 | 0.26 | +10.50 |
Drawdowns
CSHP vs. TLT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CSHP drawdown since its inception was -0.08%, smaller than the maximum TLT drawdown of -48.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSHP and TLT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CSHP | TLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.08% | -48.35% | +48.27% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.06% | -7.58% | +7.52% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -19.18% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -43.70% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -48.35% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -40.44% | +40.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.00% | -13.82% | +13.82% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.01% | 3.04% | -3.03% |
Volatility
CSHP vs. TLT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) is 0.07%, while iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT) has a volatility of 2.76%. This indicates that CSHP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TLT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CSHP | TLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.07% | 2.76% | -2.69% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.24% | 6.50% | -6.26% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.33% | 9.77% | -9.44% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.40% | 15.87% | -15.47% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 0.40% | 14.91% | -14.51% |
CSHP vs. TLT - Expense Ratio Comparison
CSHP has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than TLT's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
CSHP vs. TLT - Dividend Comparison
CSHP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.92%, less than TLT's 4.59% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF | 3.92% | 5.39% | 1.96% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TLT iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF | 4.59% | 4.43% | 4.30% | 3.38% | 2.67% | 1.50% | 1.50% | 2.27% | 2.63% | 2.43% | 2.60% | 2.61% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CSHP and TLT have a correlation of -0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TLT has higher volatility (2.76%) compared to CSHP (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CSHP dropped -0.08% vs TLT's -48.35%.
On 1-year performance, TLT leads with 4.93% vs 3.96% for CSHP. On fees, TLT is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, CSHP has been the lower-risk option at 0.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, TLT has performed better with a 4.93% return vs 3.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
TLT is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for CSHP.
TLT has the higher dividend yield at 4.59%, compared with 3.92% for CSHP.
CSHP is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while TLT is Government Bonds. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for CSHP and 0.15% for TLT.
CSHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.91 vs 0.51), 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.
Find the right allocation for CSHP and TLT
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