GBF vs. AGZ
GBF (iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF) and AGZ (iShares Agency Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GBF is a Intermediate Core Bond fund tracking the Bloomberg U.S. Government/Credit Bond Index, while AGZ is a Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg U.S. Agency Bond Index (USD). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GBF returned 1.45%/yr vs 1.81%/yr for AGZ. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.20% expense ratio.
Performance
GBF vs. AGZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GBF achieves a -0.06% return, which is significantly lower than AGZ's 0.06% return. Over the past 10 years, GBF has underperformed AGZ with an annualized return of 1.45%, while AGZ has yielded a comparatively higher 1.81% annualized return.
GBF
- 1D
- -0.41%
- 1M
- -0.34%
- YTD
- -0.06%
- 6M
- -0.10%
- 1Y
- 4.32%
- 3Y*
- 3.47%
- 5Y*
- -0.27%
- 10Y*
- 1.45%
AGZ
- 1D
- -0.16%
- 1M
- -0.25%
- YTD
- 0.06%
- 6M
- 0.46%
- 1Y
- 3.98%
- 3Y*
- 4.06%
- 5Y*
- 1.13%
- 10Y*
- 1.81%
GBF vs. AGZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GBF iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF | -0.06% | 6.41% | 0.99% | 5.79% | -13.85% | -2.30% | 8.76% | 9.47% | -0.52% | 4.10% |
AGZ iShares Agency Bond ETF | 0.06% | 6.05% | 3.08% | 5.18% | -7.77% | -1.05% | 5.77% | 5.51% | 1.32% | 2.01% |
Correlation
The correlation between GBF and AGZ is 0.79, 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 | 0.79 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.83 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 10, 2008 | 0.68 |
The correlation between GBF and AGZ shifts across timeframes, from 0.68 (all time) to 0.84 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
GBF vs. AGZ — Risk / Return Rank
GBF
AGZ
GBF vs. AGZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF (GBF) and iShares Agency Bond ETF (AGZ). 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.
| GBF | AGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.39 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.62 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.18 | 1.26 | -0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.39 | 2.68 | -1.29 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.07 | 8.81 | -4.74 |
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
| GBF | AGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.02 | 1.41 | -0.39 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.05 | 0.32 | -0.37 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.28 | 0.60 | -0.32 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.58 | 0.68 | -0.11 |
Drawdowns
GBF vs. AGZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GBF drawdown since its inception was -19.67%, which is greater than AGZ's maximum drawdown of -11.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GBF and AGZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GBF | AGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.67% | -11.01% | -8.66% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.73% | -1.35% | -1.38% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.78% | -1.85% | -3.93% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.45% | -10.66% | -7.79% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -19.67% | -11.01% | -8.66% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.10% | -0.89% | -4.21% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.67% | -1.61% | -2.06% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.93% | 0.41% | +0.52% |
Volatility
GBF vs. AGZ - Volatility Comparison
iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF (GBF) has a higher volatility of 1.20% compared to iShares Agency Bond ETF (AGZ) at 0.72%. This indicates that GBF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AGZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GBF | AGZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.20% | 0.72% | +0.48% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.66% | 1.93% | +0.73% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.73% | 2.56% | +1.17% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.93% | 3.54% | +2.39% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.28% | 3.03% | +2.25% |
GBF vs. AGZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both GBF and AGZ have an expense ratio of 0.20%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
GBF vs. AGZ - Dividend Comparison
GBF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.80%, more than AGZ's 3.73% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AGZ iShares Agency Bond ETF | 3.73% | 3.75% | 3.48% | 3.14% | 1.56% | 0.96% | 2.25% | 2.32% | 2.15% | 1.58% | 1.52% | 1.30% |
GBF iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF | 3.80% | 3.81% | 3.94% | 3.03% | 2.13% | 1.22% | 1.64% | 2.64% | 2.59% | 2.31% | 2.09% | 2.04% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GBF and AGZ have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GBF has higher volatility (1.20%) compared to AGZ (0.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GBF dropped -19.67% vs AGZ's -11.01%.
On 10-year performance, AGZ leads with 1.81% vs 1.45% for GBF. Both ETFs have the same 0.20% expense ratio. On volatility, AGZ has been the lower-risk option at 0.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, AGZ has performed better with a 1.81% return vs 1.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GBF and AGZ have the same expense ratio: 0.20% per year.
GBF has the higher dividend yield at 3.80%, compared with 3.73% for AGZ.
GBF is categorized as Intermediate Core Bond, while AGZ is Government Bonds. GBF tracks Bloomberg U.S. Government/Credit Bond Index, while AGZ tracks Bloomberg U.S. Agency Bond Index (USD).
AGZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.41 vs 1.02), 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 GBF and AGZ
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