IBGC vs. TFLO
IBGC (iShares iBonds Dec 2046 Term Treasury ETF) and TFLO (iShares Treasury Floating Rate Bond ETF) are both Government Bonds funds from iShares - IBGC tracks the ICE 2046 Maturity US Treasury Index while TFLO tracks the Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Floating Rate Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBGC charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for TFLO.
Performance
IBGC vs. TFLO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
IBGC
- 1D
- 0.10%
- 1M
- 2.56%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TFLO
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.33%
- YTD
- 1.85%
- 6M
- 1.89%
- 1Y
- 4.01%
- 3Y*
- 4.72%
- 5Y*
- 3.69%
- 10Y*
- 2.38%
IBGC vs. TFLO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
IBGC iShares iBonds Dec 2046 Term Treasury ETF | 2.82% |
TFLO iShares Treasury Floating Rate Bond ETF | 0.98% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBGC and TFLO is 0.10, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 26, 2026 | 0.10 |
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
IBGC vs. TFLO — Risk / Return Rank
IBGC
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
TFLO
IBGC vs. TFLO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2046 Term Treasury ETF (IBGC) and iShares Treasury Floating Rate Bond ETF (TFLO). 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.
| IBGC | TFLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 14.07 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 203.31 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 831.72 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IBGC vs. TFLO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBGC drawdown since its inception was -4.29%, smaller than the maximum TFLO drawdown of -5.01%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBGC and TFLO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBGC | TFLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.29% | -5.01% | +0.72% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -0.02% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -0.04% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -0.13% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -0.16% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.14% | -0.10% | -1.04% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.00% | — |
Volatility
IBGC vs. TFLO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBGC | TFLO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.09% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 0.20% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.43% | 0.29% | +8.14% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.43% | 0.36% | +8.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.43% | 0.46% | +7.97% |
IBGC vs. TFLO - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBGC has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than TFLO'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
IBGC vs. TFLO - Dividend Comparison
IBGC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.79%, less than TFLO's 3.89% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBGC iShares iBonds Dec 2046 Term Treasury ETF | 0.79% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TFLO iShares Treasury Floating Rate Bond ETF | 3.89% | 4.16% | 5.21% | 4.88% | 1.68% | 0.00% | 0.36% | 2.08% | 1.65% | 0.86% | 0.31% | 0.15% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IBGC and TFLO have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IBGC is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IBGC is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for TFLO.
TFLO has the higher dividend yield at 3.89%, compared with 0.79% for IBGC.
IBGC tracks ICE 2046 Maturity US Treasury Index, while TFLO tracks Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Floating Rate Index. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for IBGC and 0.15% for TFLO.
Find the right allocation for IBGC and TFLO
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