GBF vs. DDV
GBF (iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF) and DDV (Defined Duration 5 ETF) are both Intermediate Core Bond funds. GBF is passively managed, while DDV is actively managed. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GBF charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for DDV.
Performance
GBF vs. DDV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GBF achieves a 0.35% return, which is significantly lower than DDV's 2.21% return.
GBF
- 1D
- 0.13%
- 1M
- 0.21%
- YTD
- 0.35%
- 6M
- 0.18%
- 1Y
- 4.02%
- 3Y*
- 3.64%
- 5Y*
- -0.19%
- 10Y*
- 1.51%
DDV
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 0.49%
- YTD
- 2.21%
- 6M
- 2.67%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GBF vs. DDV - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
GBF iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF | 0.35% | 0.14% |
DDV Defined Duration 5 ETF | 2.21% | 0.71% |
Correlation
The correlation between GBF and DDV is 0.71, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 14, 2025 | 0.71 |
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. DDV — Risk / Return Rank
GBF
DDV
GBF vs. DDV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF (GBF) and Defined Duration 5 ETF (DDV). 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 | DDV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.19 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.48 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.37 | — | — |
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 | DDV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.09 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.03 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.29 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.58 | 2.04 | -1.46 |
Drawdowns
GBF vs. DDV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GBF drawdown since its inception was -19.67%, which is greater than DDV's maximum drawdown of -1.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GBF and DDV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GBF | DDV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.67% | -1.92% | -17.75% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.73% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.78% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.45% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -19.67% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.71% | -0.14% | -4.57% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.67% | -0.35% | -3.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.92% | — | — |
Volatility
GBF vs. DDV - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GBF | DDV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.21% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.64% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.75% | 2.67% | +1.08% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.93% | 2.67% | +3.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.28% | 2.67% | +2.61% |
GBF vs. DDV - Expense Ratio Comparison
GBF has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than DDV's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
GBF vs. DDV - Dividend Comparison
GBF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.78%, more than DDV's 1.21% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DDV Defined Duration 5 ETF | 1.21% | 0.42% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GBF iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF | 3.78% | 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 DDV have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GBF is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GBF is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for DDV.
GBF has the higher dividend yield at 3.78%, compared with 1.21% for DDV.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and Discipline Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for GBF and 0.25% for DDV.
Find the right allocation for GBF and DDV
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