PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IBDZ vs. FLTR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IBDZ vs. FLTR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds Dec 2034 Term Corporate ETF (IBDZ) and VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF (FLTR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBDZ achieves a 0.34% return, which is significantly lower than FLTR's 1.91% return.


IBDZ

1D
-0.19%
1M
0.37%
YTD
0.34%
6M
0.33%
1Y
6.65%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

FLTR

1D
-0.04%
1M
0.46%
YTD
1.91%
6M
2.40%
1Y
5.30%
3Y*
6.10%
5Y*
4.49%
10Y*
3.51%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IBDZ vs. FLTR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between IBDZ and FLTR is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.13

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2024

0.08

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

IBDZ vs. FLTR — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBDZ
IBDZ Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
IBDZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBDZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBDZ Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
IBDZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 4545
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBDZ Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank

FLTR
FLTR Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
FLTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLTR Omega Ratio Rank: 9999
Omega Ratio Rank
FLTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLTR Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
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.

IBDZ vs. FLTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2034 Term Corporate ETF (IBDZ) and VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF (FLTR). 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.


IBDZFLTRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-5.36

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-10.69

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

3.15

-1.90

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.19

16.96

-14.77

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.12

101.23

-94.11

IBDZ vs. FLTR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBDZ Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is lower than the FLTR Sharpe Ratio of 6.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBDZ and FLTR, 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


IBDZFLTRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.41

6.77

-5.36

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

2.11

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.70

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.06

0.53

+0.54

Drawdowns

IBDZ vs. FLTR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBDZ drawdown since its inception was -5.57%, smaller than the maximum FLTR drawdown of -17.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBDZ and FLTR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IBDZFLTRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-5.57%

-17.84%

+12.27%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.04%

-0.31%

-2.73%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-1.93%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-3.06%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-17.84%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.26%

-0.04%

-1.22%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.28%

-0.67%

-0.61%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.94%

0.05%

+0.89%

Volatility

IBDZ vs. FLTR - Volatility Comparison

iShares iBonds Dec 2034 Term Corporate ETF (IBDZ) has a higher volatility of 1.43% compared to VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF (FLTR) at 0.25%. This indicates that IBDZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IBDZFLTRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.43%

0.25%

+1.18%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.32%

0.62%

+2.70%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.74%

0.79%

+3.95%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.27%

2.13%

+4.14%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.27%

5.00%

+1.27%

IBDZ vs. FLTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBDZ has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than FLTR's 0.14% 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

IBDZ vs. FLTR - Dividend Comparison

IBDZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.86%, more than FLTR's 4.73% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FLTR
VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF
4.73%4.97%5.93%6.07%2.29%0.63%1.49%3.05%2.67%1.69%1.16%0.71%
IBDZ
iShares iBonds Dec 2034 Term Corporate ETF
4.86%4.85%2.50%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


IBDZ and FLTR have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IBDZ has higher volatility (1.43%) compared to FLTR (0.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBDZ dropped -5.57% vs FLTR's -17.84%.

On 1-year performance, IBDZ leads with 6.65% vs 5.30% for FLTR. On fees, IBDZ is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, FLTR has been the lower-risk option at 0.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, IBDZ has performed better with a 6.65% return vs 5.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IBDZ is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.14% for FLTR.

IBDZ has the higher dividend yield at 4.86%, compared with 4.73% for FLTR.

IBDZ tracks iBonds Dec 2034 Term Corporate Index, while FLTR tracks MVIS US Investment Grade Floating Rate Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for IBDZ and 0.14% for FLTR.

FLTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.77 vs 1.41), 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 IBDZ and FLTR

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