IBGB vs. ZTEN
IBGB (iShares iBonds Dec 2045 Term Treasury ETF) and ZTEN (F/M 10-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBGB is a Government Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2045 Maturity US Treasury Index, while ZTEN is a Long-Term Bond fund tracking the ICE 10-Year US Target Maturity Corporate Index - Benchmark TR Gross. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IBGB returned 4.27% vs 5.69% for ZTEN. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IBGB charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for ZTEN.
Performance
IBGB vs. ZTEN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IBGB achieves a -0.91% return, which is significantly lower than ZTEN's 0.17% return.
IBGB
- 1D
- 0.28%
- 1M
- -1.01%
- 6M
- -1.98%
- YTD
- -0.91%
- 1Y
- 4.27%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ZTEN
- 1D
- 0.34%
- 1M
- -0.40%
- 6M
- -0.28%
- YTD
- 0.17%
- 1Y
- 5.69%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IBGB vs. ZTEN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IBGB iShares iBonds Dec 2045 Term Treasury ETF | -0.91% | 2.62% |
ZTEN F/M 10-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 0.17% | 6.90% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBGB and ZTEN 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 26, 2025 | 0.89 |
The correlation between IBGB and ZTEN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.90 - 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. ZTEN — Risk / Return Rank
IBGB
ZTEN
IBGB vs. ZTEN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2045 Term Treasury ETF (IBGB) and F/M 10-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (ZTEN). 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.
| IBGB | ZTEN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.63 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.87 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.09 | 1.20 | -0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.63 | 1.72 | -1.09 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.54 | 5.22 | -3.68 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IBGB vs. ZTEN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBGB drawdown since its inception was -8.09%, which is greater than ZTEN's maximum drawdown of -3.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBGB and ZTEN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBGB | ZTEN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.09% | -3.43% | -4.66% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.79% | -3.32% | -3.47% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.67% | -1.45% | -3.22% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.22% | -0.82% | -2.40% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.77% | 1.09% | +1.68% |
Volatility
IBGB vs. ZTEN - Volatility Comparison
iShares iBonds Dec 2045 Term Treasury ETF (IBGB) has a higher volatility of 2.26% compared to F/M 10-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (ZTEN) at 1.37%. This indicates that IBGB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZTEN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBGB | ZTEN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.26% | 1.37% | +0.89% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.08% | 4.00% | +2.08% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.14% | 4.95% | +3.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.39% | 5.75% | +3.64% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.39% | 5.75% | +3.64% |
IBGB vs. ZTEN - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBGB has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than ZTEN'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. ZTEN - Dividend Comparison
IBGB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.68%, less than ZTEN's 5.04% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
IBGB iShares iBonds Dec 2045 Term Treasury ETF | 4.68% | 3.53% | 0.00% |
ZTEN F/M 10-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 5.04% | 5.16% | 0.44% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IBGB and ZTEN have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IBGB has higher volatility (2.26%) compared to ZTEN (1.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBGB dropped -8.09% vs ZTEN's -3.43%.
On 1-year performance, ZTEN leads with 5.69% vs 4.27% for IBGB. On fees, IBGB is cheaper at 0.07% per year. On volatility, ZTEN has been the lower-risk option at 1.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, ZTEN has performed better with a 5.69% return vs 4.27%. 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 ZTEN.
ZTEN has the higher dividend yield at 5.04%, compared with 4.68% for IBGB.
IBGB is categorized as Government Bonds, while ZTEN is Long-Term Bond. IBGB tracks ICE 2045 Maturity US Treasury Index, while ZTEN tracks ICE 10-Year US Target Maturity Corporate Index - Benchmark TR Gross. They also come from different issuers: iShares and F/m. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for IBGB and 0.15% for ZTEN.
ZTEN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.16 vs 0.53), 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 ZTEN
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