DFGP vs. BINC

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

DFGP (Dimensional Global Core Plus Fixed Income ETF) and BINC (iShares Flexible Income Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DFGP is a Global Bonds fund actively managed by Dimensional, while BINC is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by iShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, DFGP returned 5.48% vs 5.94% for BINC. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DFGP charges 0.22%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for BINC.

Performance

DFGP vs. BINC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Dimensional Global Core Plus Fixed Income ETF (DFGP) and iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DFGP achieves a 1.35% return, which is significantly higher than BINC's 1.02% return.

DFGP

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 0.72%
• YTD: 1.35%
• 6M: 1.17%
• 1Y: 5.48%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BINC

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 0.50%
• YTD: 1.02%
• 6M: 1.49%
• 1Y: 5.94%
• 3Y*: 7.06%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DFGP vs. BINC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
DFGP Dimensional Global Core Plus Fixed Income ETF	1.35%	5.89%	3.71%	6.24%
BINC iShares Flexible Income Active ETF	1.02%	7.57%	5.76%	4.51%

Correlation

The correlation between DFGP and BINC is 0.83, 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	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 9, 2023	0.80

The correlation between DFGP and BINC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

DFGP vs. BINC — Risk / Return Rank

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

DFGP

DFGP Risk / Return Rank: 37
DFGP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
DFGP Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
DFGP Omega Ratio Rank: 38
DFGP Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
DFGP Martin Ratio Rank: 36

BINC

BINC Risk / Return Rank: 69
BINC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
BINC Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
BINC Omega Ratio Rank: 86
BINC Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
BINC Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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.

DFGP vs. BINC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Dimensional Global Core Plus Fixed Income ETF (DFGP) and iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC). 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.

	DFGP	BINC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.39	2.62	-1.23
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.01	3.81	-1.81
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.53	-0.28
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.66	2.22	-0.56
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	5.68	8.77	-3.09
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DFGP vs. BINC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DFGP Sharpe Ratio is 1.39, which is lower than the BINC Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DFGP and BINC, 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

	DFGP	BINC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.39	2.62	-1.23
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.46	2.38	-0.92

Drawdowns

DFGP vs. BINC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DFGP drawdown since its inception was -3.24%, which is greater than BINC's maximum drawdown of -2.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DFGP and BINC.

Drawdown Indicators

	DFGP	BINC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.24%	-2.69%	-0.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.24%	-2.69%	-0.55%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-2.69%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.71%	-0.37%	-0.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.78%	-0.36%	-0.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.95%	0.68%	+0.27%

Volatility

DFGP vs. BINC - Volatility Comparison

Dimensional Global Core Plus Fixed Income ETF (DFGP) has a higher volatility of 1.66% compared to iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) at 0.76%. This indicates that DFGP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BINC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DFGP	BINC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.66%	0.76%	+0.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.26%	1.84%	+1.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.95%	2.27%	+1.68%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.66%	3.00%	+1.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.66%	3.00%	+1.66%

DFGP vs. BINC - Expense Ratio Comparison

DFGP has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is lower than BINC's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

DFGP vs. BINC - Dividend Comparison

DFGP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.64%, less than BINC's 5.86% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BINC iShares Flexible Income Active ETF	5.86%	5.86%	6.14%	3.13%
DFGP Dimensional Global Core Plus Fixed Income ETF	3.64%	3.45%	4.51%	0.62%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DFGP and BINC in my portfolio?

DFGP and BINC have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DFGP or BINC?

DFGP has higher volatility (1.66%) compared to BINC (0.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DFGP dropped -3.24% vs BINC's -2.69%.

Which ETF is better, DFGP or BINC?

On 1-year performance, BINC leads with 5.94% vs 5.48% for DFGP. On fees, DFGP is cheaper at 0.22% per year. On volatility, BINC has been the lower-risk option at 0.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DFGP or BINC?

Over the 1-year period, BINC has performed better with a 5.94% return vs 5.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DFGP or BINC?

DFGP is cheaper with a 0.22% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for BINC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DFGP or BINC?

BINC has the higher dividend yield at 5.86%, compared with 3.64% for DFGP.

What is the main difference between DFGP and BINC?

DFGP is categorized as Global Bonds, while BINC is Multisector Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Dimensional and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for DFGP and 0.40% for BINC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BINC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 vs 1.39), 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.