IBHJ vs. BLV

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IBHJ (iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF) and BLV (Vanguard Long-Term Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBHJ is a High Yield Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg 2030 Term High Yield and Income Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while BLV is a Long-Term Bond fund tracking the Bloomberg U.S. Long Government/Credit Float Adjusted Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IBHJ returned 7.29% vs 6.59% for BLV. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IBHJ charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for BLV.

Performance

IBHJ vs. BLV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHJ) and Vanguard Long-Term Bond ETF (BLV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBHJ achieves a 1.50% return, which is significantly higher than BLV's 0.28% return.

IBHJ

• 1D: -0.34%
• 1M: 0.50%
• YTD: 1.50%
• 6M: 2.06%
• 1Y: 7.29%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BLV

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: 1.09%
• YTD: 0.28%
• 6M: -0.86%
• 1Y: 6.59%
• 3Y*: 2.02%
• 5Y*: -3.33%
• 10Y*: 0.99%

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

IBHJ vs. BLV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
IBHJ iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF	1.50%	9.28%	7.32%	8.37%
BLV Vanguard Long-Term Bond ETF	0.28%	6.44%	-3.65%	2.22%

Correlation

The correlation between IBHJ and BLV is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.48
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2023	0.58

The correlation between IBHJ and BLV shifts across timeframes, from 0.48 (1 year) to 0.58 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

IBHJ vs. BLV — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBHJ

IBHJ Risk / Return Rank: 59
IBHJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
IBHJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
IBHJ Omega Ratio Rank: 56
IBHJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
IBHJ Martin Ratio Rank: 72

BLV

BLV Risk / Return Rank: 23
BLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
BLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
BLV Omega Ratio Rank: 21
BLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
BLV Martin Ratio Rank: 23

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.

IBHJ vs. BLV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHJ) and Vanguard Long-Term Bond ETF (BLV). 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.

	IBHJ	BLV	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.80	0.81	+0.99
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.65	1.21	+1.44
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.14	+0.20
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.98	1.15	+1.82
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	13.41	2.92	+10.49
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IBHJ vs. BLV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBHJ Sharpe Ratio is 1.80, which is higher than the BLV Sharpe Ratio of 0.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBHJ and BLV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IBHJ	BLV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.80	0.81	+0.99
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.26	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.08	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.53	0.37	+1.16

Drawdowns

IBHJ vs. BLV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBHJ drawdown since its inception was -4.93%, smaller than the maximum BLV drawdown of -38.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBHJ and BLV.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBHJ	BLV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.93%	-38.29%	+33.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.46%	-5.73%	+3.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.16%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-36.27%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-38.29%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.39%	-24.14%	+23.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.62%	-9.51%	+8.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.54%	2.26%	-1.72%

Volatility

IBHJ vs. BLV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF (IBHJ) is 1.09%, while Vanguard Long-Term Bond ETF (BLV) has a volatility of 2.50%. This indicates that IBHJ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BLV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IBHJ	BLV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.09%	2.50%	-1.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.20%	5.62%	-2.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.07%	8.15%	-4.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.95%	12.97%	-7.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.95%	11.98%	-6.03%

IBHJ vs. BLV - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBHJ has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than BLV's 0.03% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBHJ vs. BLV - Dividend Comparison

IBHJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.68%, more than BLV's 4.80% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BLV Vanguard Long-Term Bond ETF	4.80%	4.67%	5.09%	4.06%	4.17%	3.37%	6.12%	3.57%	4.07%	3.63%	4.16%	4.37%
IBHJ iShares iBonds 2030 Term High Yield and Income ETF	6.68%	6.64%	6.87%	3.66%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBHJ and BLV in my portfolio?

IBHJ and BLV have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IBHJ or BLV?

BLV has higher volatility (2.50%) compared to IBHJ (1.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBHJ dropped -4.93% vs BLV's -38.29%.

Which ETF is better, IBHJ or BLV?

On 1-year performance, IBHJ leads with 7.29% vs 6.59% for BLV. On fees, BLV is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, IBHJ has been the lower-risk option at 1.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IBHJ or BLV?

Over the 1-year period, IBHJ has performed better with a 7.29% return vs 6.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBHJ or BLV?

BLV is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for IBHJ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBHJ or BLV?

IBHJ has the higher dividend yield at 6.68%, compared with 4.80% for BLV.

What is the main difference between IBHJ and BLV?

IBHJ is categorized as High Yield Bonds, while BLV is Long-Term Bond. IBHJ tracks Bloomberg 2030 Term High Yield and Income Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while BLV tracks Bloomberg U.S. Long Government/Credit Float Adjusted Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for IBHJ and 0.03% for BLV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBHJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.80 vs 0.81), 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.