GTOH vs. HYLB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GTOH (Invesco Short Duration High Yield ETF) and HYLB (Xtrackers USD High Yield Corporate Bond ETF) are both High Yield Bonds funds. GTOH is actively managed, while HYLB is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, GTOH returned 7.86%/yr vs 8.72%/yr for HYLB. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GTOH charges 0.48%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for HYLB.

Performance

GTOH vs. HYLB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Short Duration High Yield ETF (GTOH) and Xtrackers USD High Yield Corporate Bond ETF (HYLB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GTOH achieves a 1.66% return, which is significantly higher than HYLB's 1.53% return.

GTOH

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: 0.42%
• YTD: 1.66%
• 6M: 1.83%
• 1Y: 6.97%
• 3Y*: 7.86%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

HYLB

• 1D: -0.18%
• 1M: 0.38%
• YTD: 1.53%
• 6M: 2.00%
• 1Y: 6.87%
• 3Y*: 8.72%
• 5Y*: 4.04%
• 10Y*: —

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

GTOH vs. HYLB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
GTOH Invesco Short Duration High Yield ETF	1.66%	7.91%	6.57%	10.54%	-1.34%
HYLB Xtrackers USD High Yield Corporate Bond ETF	1.53%	8.74%	8.14%	12.03%	-1.40%

Correlation

The correlation between GTOH and HYLB is 0.87, 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	0.87
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 12, 2022	0.86

The correlation between GTOH and HYLB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GTOH vs. HYLB — Risk / Return Rank

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

GTOH

GTOH Risk / Return Rank: 75
GTOH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
GTOH Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
GTOH Omega Ratio Rank: 77
GTOH Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
GTOH Martin Ratio Rank: 78

HYLB

HYLB Risk / Return Rank: 60
HYLB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
HYLB Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
HYLB Omega Ratio Rank: 59
HYLB Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
HYLB Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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.

GTOH vs. HYLB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Short Duration High Yield ETF (GTOH) and Xtrackers USD High Yield Corporate Bond ETF (HYLB). 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.

	GTOH	HYLB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.34	1.86	+0.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.63	2.83	+0.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.37	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.06	3.04	+0.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.02	13.06	+1.96
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GTOH vs. HYLB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GTOH Sharpe Ratio is 2.34, which is comparable to the HYLB Sharpe Ratio of 1.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GTOH and HYLB, 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

	GTOH	HYLB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.34	1.86	+0.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.54	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.63	0.58	+1.05

Drawdowns

GTOH vs. HYLB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GTOH drawdown since its inception was -4.77%, smaller than the maximum HYLB drawdown of -22.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GTOH and HYLB.

Drawdown Indicators

	GTOH	HYLB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.77%	-22.91%	+18.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.29%	-2.27%	-0.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-4.13%	-4.51%	+0.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-15.54%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.20%	-0.19%	-0.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.67%	-2.43%	+1.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.47%	0.53%	-0.06%

Volatility

GTOH vs. HYLB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Short Duration High Yield ETF (GTOH) is 0.82%, while Xtrackers USD High Yield Corporate Bond ETF (HYLB) has a volatility of 1.20%. This indicates that GTOH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HYLB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GTOH	HYLB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.82%	1.20%	-0.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.30%	2.93%	-0.63%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.99%	3.70%	-0.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.47%	7.47%	-3.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.47%	8.18%	-3.71%

GTOH vs. HYLB - Expense Ratio Comparison

GTOH has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is higher than HYLB's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

GTOH vs. HYLB - Dividend Comparison

GTOH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.24%, less than HYLB's 6.49% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
GTOH Invesco Short Duration High Yield ETF	6.24%	6.57%	6.81%	6.81%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
HYLB Xtrackers USD High Yield Corporate Bond ETF	6.49%	6.29%	6.31%	5.84%	5.53%	4.45%	5.22%	5.71%	5.95%	5.85%	0.27%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GTOH and HYLB in my portfolio?

GTOH and HYLB have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GTOH or HYLB?

HYLB has higher volatility (1.20%) compared to GTOH (0.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GTOH dropped -4.77% vs HYLB's -22.91%.

Which ETF is better, GTOH or HYLB?

On 3-year performance, HYLB leads with 8.72% vs 7.86% for GTOH. On fees, HYLB is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, GTOH has been the lower-risk option at 0.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GTOH or HYLB?

Over the 3-year period, HYLB has performed better with a 8.72% return vs 7.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GTOH or HYLB?

HYLB is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.48% for GTOH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GTOH or HYLB?

HYLB has the higher dividend yield at 6.49%, compared with 6.24% for GTOH.

What is the main difference between GTOH and HYLB?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and DWS. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for GTOH and 0.15% for HYLB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GTOH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.34 vs 1.86), 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.