IBAT vs. TLT
IBAT (iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF) and TLT (iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBAT is a Alternative Energy Equities fund tracking the STOXX Global Energy Storage and Materials, while TLT is a Government Bonds fund tracking the ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IBAT returned 63.73% vs -2.45% for TLT. Their 0.15 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. IBAT charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for TLT.
Performance
IBAT vs. TLT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IBAT achieves a 32.65% return, which is significantly higher than TLT's -3.49% return.
IBAT
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- -12.41%
- 6M
- 17.70%
- YTD
- 32.65%
- 1Y
- 63.73%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 19.39%
TLT
- 1D
- -0.66%
- 1M
- -3.81%
- 6M
- -3.46%
- YTD
- -3.49%
- 1Y
- -2.45%
- 3Y*
- -1.80%
- 5Y*
- -8.18%
- 10Y*
- -2.38%
- ALL TIME*
- 3.47%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $1.10M | $1.47M | $2.33M | |
| $2.33B | $2.02B | $2.19B |
IBAT vs. TLT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
IBAT iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF | 32.65% | 32.09% | -13.29% |
TLT iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF | -3.49% | 4.25% | -2.74% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBAT and TLT is 0.15, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.15 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 21, 2024 | 0.16 |
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
IBAT vs. TLT — Risk / Return Rank
IBAT
TLT
IBAT vs. TLT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF (IBAT) 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| IBAT | TLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.09 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.55 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 0.99 | +0.34 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.42 | -0.14 | +2.55 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.73 | -0.30 | +9.02 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IBAT vs. TLT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBAT drawdown since its inception was -28.26%, smaller than the maximum TLT drawdown of -48.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBAT and TLT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBAT | TLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -28.26% | -48.35% | +20.09% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -25.85% | -7.74% | -18.11% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.79% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -43.70% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -48.35% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -20.73% | -42.36% | +21.63% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.03% | -13.99% | +5.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.15% | 3.57% | +3.58% |
Volatility
IBAT vs. TLT - Volatility Comparison
iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF (IBAT) has a higher volatility of 12.10% compared to iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT) at 2.46%. This indicates that IBAT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TLT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBAT | TLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.10% | 2.46% | +9.64% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 26.99% | 6.85% | +20.14% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 31.59% | 9.32% | +22.27% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.08% | 15.74% | +10.34% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.08% | 14.83% | +11.25% |
IBAT vs. TLT - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBAT has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is higher than TLT's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
IBAT vs. TLT - Dividend Comparison
IBAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.80%, less than TLT's 4.75% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBAT iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF | 0.80% | 1.15% | 1.37% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TLT iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF | 4.34% | 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
IBAT and TLT have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IBAT has higher volatility (12.10%) compared to TLT (2.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBAT dropped -28.26% vs TLT's -48.35%.
On 1-year performance, IBAT leads with 63.73% vs -2.45% for TLT. On fees, TLT is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, TLT has been the lower-risk option at 2.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, IBAT has performed better with a 63.73% return vs -2.45%. 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 0.47% for IBAT.
TLT has the higher dividend yield at 4.34%, compared with 0.80% for IBAT.
IBAT is categorized as Alternative Energy Equities, while TLT is Government Bonds. IBAT tracks STOXX Global Energy Storage and Materials, while TLT tracks ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for IBAT and 0.15% for TLT.
IBAT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.98 vs -0.11), 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 IBAT 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