IBGC vs. XHLF

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

IBGC (iShares iBonds Dec 2046 Term Treasury ETF) and XHLF (BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF) are both Government Bonds funds - IBGC tracks the ICE 2046 Maturity US Treasury Index while XHLF tracks the Bloomberg US Treasury 6 Month Duration Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.00 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBGC charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for XHLF.

Performance

IBGC vs. XHLF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds Dec 2046 Term Treasury ETF (IBGC) and BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF (XHLF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

IBGC

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: -1.61%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

XHLF

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: 0.28%
• 6M: 1.70%
• YTD: 1.80%
• 1Y: 3.85%
• 3Y*: 4.58%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IBGC vs. XHLF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
IBGC iShares iBonds Dec 2046 Term Treasury ETF	-0.01%
XHLF BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF	1.08%

Correlation

The correlation between IBGC and XHLF is 0.00, 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	0.00

Return for Risk

IBGC vs. XHLF — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBGC

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

XHLF

XHLF Risk / Return Rank: 100
XHLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
XHLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
XHLF Omega Ratio Rank: 100
XHLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
XHLF Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

IBGC vs. XHLF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2046 Term Treasury ETF (IBGC) and BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF (XHLF). 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	XHLF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	11.99	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	43.56	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	10.75	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	97.08	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	640.50	—

Drawdowns

IBGC vs. XHLF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBGC drawdown since its inception was -4.29%, which is greater than XHLF's maximum drawdown of -0.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBGC and XHLF.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBGC	XHLF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.29%	-0.11%	-4.18%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-0.04%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-0.06%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.95%	-0.01%	-2.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.33%	-0.01%	-1.32%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.01%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	IBGC	XHLF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	0.10%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	0.22%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.33%	0.32%	+8.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.33%	0.42%	+7.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.33%	0.42%	+7.91%

IBGC vs. XHLF - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBGC has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is higher than XHLF's 0.03% expense ratio. However, 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. XHLF - Dividend Comparison

IBGC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.21%, less than XHLF's 3.82% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
IBGC iShares iBonds Dec 2046 Term Treasury ETF	1.21%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XHLF BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF	3.82%	3.98%	4.96%	4.50%	0.86%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBGC and XHLF in my portfolio?

IBGC and XHLF have a correlation of 0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, IBGC or XHLF?

On fees, XHLF is cheaper at 0.03% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBGC or XHLF?

XHLF is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.07% for IBGC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBGC or XHLF?

XHLF has the higher dividend yield at 3.82%, compared with 1.21% for IBGC.

What is the main difference between IBGC and XHLF?

IBGC tracks ICE 2046 Maturity US Treasury Index, while XHLF tracks Bloomberg US Treasury 6 Month Duration Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BondBloxx. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for IBGC and 0.03% for XHLF.