GBF vs. VGVT
GBF (iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF) and VGVT (Vanguard Government Securities Active ETF) are both Intermediate Core Bond funds. GBF is passively managed, while VGVT is actively managed. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GBF charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for VGVT.
Performance
GBF vs. VGVT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GBF achieves a 0.35% return, which is significantly higher than VGVT's 0.15% 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%
VGVT
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- 0.09%
- YTD
- 0.15%
- 6M
- 0.24%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GBF vs. VGVT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
GBF iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF | 0.35% | 2.93% |
VGVT Vanguard Government Securities Active ETF | 0.15% | 3.28% |
Correlation
The correlation between GBF and VGVT is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 10, 2025 | 0.90 |
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. VGVT — Risk / Return Rank
GBF
VGVT
GBF vs. VGVT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Government/Credit Bond ETF (GBF) and Vanguard Government Securities Active ETF (VGVT). 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 | VGVT | 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 | VGVT | 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 | 1.19 | -0.61 |
Drawdowns
GBF vs. VGVT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GBF drawdown since its inception was -19.67%, which is greater than VGVT's maximum drawdown of -2.77%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GBF and VGVT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GBF | VGVT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.67% | -2.77% | -16.90% |
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% | -1.71% | -3.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.67% | -0.67% | -3.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.92% | — | — |
Volatility
GBF vs. VGVT - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GBF | VGVT | 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% | 3.22% | +0.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.93% | 3.22% | +2.71% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.28% | 3.22% | +2.06% |
GBF vs. VGVT - Expense Ratio Comparison
GBF has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than VGVT's 0.10% 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. VGVT - Dividend Comparison
GBF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.78%, less than VGVT's 3.98% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
VGVT Vanguard Government Securities Active ETF | 3.98% | 2.29% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.90, GBF and VGVT 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.
On fees, VGVT is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
VGVT is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for GBF.
VGVT has the higher dividend yield at 3.98%, compared with 3.78% for GBF.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for GBF and 0.10% for VGVT.
Find the right allocation for GBF and VGVT
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