PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
GBF vs. TLT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

GBF vs. TLT

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

GBF (iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF) and TLT (iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GBF is a Intermediate Core Bond fund tracking the Bloomberg U.S. Government/Credit Bond Index, while TLT is a Government Bonds fund tracking the ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, GBF returned 1.51%/yr vs -1.56%/yr for TLT. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GBF charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for TLT.

Performance

GBF vs. TLT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF (GBF) and iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GBF achieves a 0.35% return, which is significantly higher than TLT's -0.05% return. Over the past 10 years, GBF has outperformed TLT with an annualized return of 1.51%, while TLT has yielded a comparatively lower -1.56% annualized 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%

TLT

1D
0.22%
1M
0.48%
YTD
-0.05%
6M
-1.27%
1Y
3.48%
3Y*
-1.67%
5Y*
-6.27%
10Y*
-1.56%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GBF vs. TLT - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GBF
iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF		0.35%6.41%0.99%5.79%-13.85%-2.30%8.76%9.47%-0.52%4.10%
TLT
iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF		-0.05%4.25%-8.05%2.77%-31.23%-4.60%18.15%14.12%-1.61%9.18%

Correlation

The correlation between GBF and TLT is 0.93, 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

0.93

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.94

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.93

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 12, 2007

0.81

The correlation between GBF and TLT shifts across timeframes, from 0.81 (all time) to 0.94 (3 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.

iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF

iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF

Often compared with GBF:
GBF vs. GVIGBF vs. AGZGBF vs. CMBSGBF vs. NUBDGBF vs. VOOGBF vs. AGGGBF vs. SCHZ
Often compared with TLT:
TLT vs. SPYTLT vs. IEFTLT vs. TMFTLT vs. BNDTLT vs. VGLTTLT vs. TLTWTLT vs. EDV

Return for Risk

GBF vs. TLT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
GBF
GBF Risk / Return Rank: 3030
Overall Rank
GBF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GBF Sortino Ratio Rank: 3131
Sortino Ratio Rank
GBF Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
GBF Calmar Ratio Rank: 3131
Calmar Ratio Rank
GBF Martin Ratio Rank: 3030
Martin Ratio Rank
TLT
TLT Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
TLT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1515
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TLT Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
TLT Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
TLT Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
TLT Martin Ratio Rank: 1515
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

GBF vs. TLT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF (GBF) 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.

GBFTLTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.09
0.36

+0.73

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.62
0.59

+1.03

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.07

+0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.48

0.46

+1.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.37

1.14

+3.22

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GBF vs. TLT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GBF Sharpe Ratio is 1.09, which is higher than the TLT Sharpe Ratio of 0.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GBF and TLT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

GBFTLTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.09

0.36

+0.73

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.03

-0.40

+0.37

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.29

-0.11

+0.39

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.58

0.26

+0.32

Drawdowns

GBF vs. TLT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GBF drawdown since its inception was -19.67%, smaller than the maximum TLT drawdown of -48.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GBF and TLT.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

GBFTLTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.67%

-48.35%

+28.68%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.73%

-7.58%

+4.85%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.78%

-19.18%

+13.40%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.45%

-43.70%

+25.25%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-19.67%

-48.35%

+28.68%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.71%

-40.31%

+35.60%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.67%

-13.82%

+10.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.92%

3.05%

-2.13%

Volatility

GBF vs. TLT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF (GBF) is 1.21%, while iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT) has a volatility of 2.71%. This indicates that GBF 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

GBFTLTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.21%

2.71%

-1.50%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.64%

6.50%

-3.86%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.75%

9.77%

-6.02%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.93%

15.86%

-9.93%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.28%

14.90%

-9.62%

GBF vs. TLT - Expense Ratio Comparison

GBF 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

GBF vs. TLT - Dividend Comparison

GBF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.78%, less than TLT's 4.58% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
TLT
iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF		4.58%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

With a correlation of 0.93, GBF and TLT 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.

TLT has higher volatility (2.71%) compared to GBF (1.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GBF dropped -19.67% vs TLT's -48.35%.

On 10-year performance, GBF leads with 1.51% vs -1.56% for TLT. On fees, TLT is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, GBF has been the lower-risk option at 1.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, GBF has performed better with a 1.51% return vs -1.56%. 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 GBF.

TLT has the higher dividend yield at 4.58%, compared with 3.78% for GBF.

GBF is categorized as Intermediate Core Bond, while TLT is Government Bonds. GBF tracks Bloomberg U.S. Government/Credit Bond Index, while TLT tracks ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for GBF and 0.15% for TLT.

GBF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.09 vs 0.36), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for GBF 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