IBGB vs. TLT
IBGB (iShares iBonds Dec 2045 Term Treasury ETF) and TLT (iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF) are both Government Bonds funds from iShares - IBGB tracks the ICE 2045 Maturity US Treasury Index while TLT tracks the ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IBGB returned 4.04% vs 3.48% for TLT. With a 0.99 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. IBGB charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for TLT.
Performance
IBGB vs. TLT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IBGB achieves a -0.23% return, which is significantly lower than TLT's -0.05% return.
IBGB
- 1D
- 0.17%
- 1M
- 0.38%
- YTD
- -0.23%
- 6M
- -0.92%
- 1Y
- 4.04%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
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%
IBGB vs. TLT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IBGB iShares iBonds Dec 2045 Term Treasury ETF | -0.23% | 2.71% |
TLT iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF | -0.05% | 1.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBGB and TLT is 0.99 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.99 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 27, 2025 | 0.99 |
The correlation between IBGB and TLT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.99 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
IBGB vs. TLT — Risk / Return Rank
IBGB
TLT
IBGB vs. TLT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2045 Term Treasury ETF (IBGB) 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.
| IBGB | TLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.13 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.16 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.09 | 1.07 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.60 | 0.46 | +0.14 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.61 | 1.14 | +0.46 |
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
| IBGB | TLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.49 | 0.36 | +0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | -0.40 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | -0.11 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.22 | 0.26 | -0.04 |
Drawdowns
IBGB vs. TLT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBGB drawdown since its inception was -8.09%, smaller than the maximum TLT drawdown of -48.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBGB and TLT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBGB | TLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.09% | -48.35% | +40.26% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.79% | -7.58% | +0.79% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -19.18% | — |
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 | -4.02% | -40.31% | +36.29% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.17% | -13.82% | +10.65% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.52% | 3.05% | -0.53% |
Volatility
IBGB vs. TLT - Volatility Comparison
iShares iBonds Dec 2045 Term Treasury ETF (IBGB) and iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT) have volatilities of 2.58% and 2.71%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBGB | TLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.58% | 2.71% | -0.13% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.79% | 6.50% | -0.71% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.44% | 9.77% | -1.33% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.52% | 15.86% | -6.34% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.52% | 14.90% | -5.38% |
IBGB vs. TLT - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBGB has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than TLT's 0.15% 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
IBGB vs. TLT - Dividend Comparison
IBGB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.63%, more than TLT's 4.58% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBGB iShares iBonds Dec 2045 Term Treasury ETF | 4.63% | 3.53% | 0.00% | 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 | 4.58% | 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 0.99, IBGB 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 IBGB (2.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBGB dropped -8.09% vs TLT's -48.35%.
On 1-year performance, IBGB leads with 4.04% vs 3.48% for TLT. On fees, IBGB is cheaper at 0.07% per year. On volatility, IBGB has been the lower-risk option at 2.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, IBGB has performed better with a 4.04% return vs 3.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IBGB is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for TLT.
IBGB has the higher dividend yield at 4.63%, compared with 4.58% for TLT.
IBGB tracks ICE 2045 Maturity US Treasury Index, while TLT tracks ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for IBGB and 0.15% for TLT.
IBGB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.49 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.
Find the right allocation for IBGB 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