IBTG.L vs. CNYB.L
IBTG.L (iShares $ Treasury Bond 1-3yr UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist)) and CNYB.L (iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist)) are both exchange-traded funds - IBTG.L is a Government Bonds fund tracking the iShares $ Treasury Bond 1-3yr UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist), while CNYB.L is a Emerging Markets Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IBTG.L returned 1.54%/yr vs 3.58%/yr for CNYB.L. At a correlation of -0.06, they often move in opposite directions. IBTG.L charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for CNYB.L.
Performance
IBTG.L vs. CNYB.L - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IBTG.L achieves a 0.68% return, which is significantly lower than CNYB.L's 5.08% return.
IBTG.L
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 0.08%
- 6M
- 0.68%
- YTD
- 0.68%
- 1Y
- 3.11%
- 3Y*
- 4.05%
- 5Y*
- 1.54%
- 10Y*
- —
CNYB.L
- 1D
- 0.23%
- 1M
- -0.13%
- 6M
- 4.82%
- YTD
- 5.08%
- 1Y
- 7.11%
- 3Y*
- 4.85%
- 5Y*
- 3.58%
- 10Y*
- —
IBTG.L vs. CNYB.L - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBTG.L iShares $ Treasury Bond 1-3yr UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) | 0.68% | 5.08% | 3.75% | 3.65% | -4.56% | -0.82% | 2.70% | 0.42% |
CNYB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 5.08% | -2.20% | 6.65% | -4.09% | 6.21% | 9.69% | -19.80% | 0.53% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBTG.L and CNYB.L is -0.02, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.02 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.08 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.08 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2019 | -0.06 |
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
IBTG.L vs. CNYB.L — Risk / Return Rank
IBTG.L
CNYB.L
IBTG.L vs. CNYB.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares $ Treasury Bond 1-3yr UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (IBTG.L) and iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.L). 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.
| IBTG.L | CNYB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.66 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.19 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.57 | 1.21 | +0.37 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.62 | 2.57 | +2.05 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.41 | 6.13 | +8.28 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IBTG.L vs. CNYB.L - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBTG.L drawdown since its inception was -6.15%, smaller than the maximum CNYB.L drawdown of -25.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBTG.L and CNYB.L.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBTG.L | CNYB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -6.15% | -25.82% | +19.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.67% | -2.75% | +2.08% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -0.85% | -9.03% | +8.18% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -6.13% | -15.44% | +9.31% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -7.25% | +7.25% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.25% | -12.53% | +11.28% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.22% | 1.16% | -0.94% |
Volatility
IBTG.L vs. CNYB.L - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares $ Treasury Bond 1-3yr UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) (IBTG.L) is 0.45%, while iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) (CNYB.L) has a volatility of 1.68%. This indicates that IBTG.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNYB.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBTG.L | CNYB.L | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.45% | 1.68% | -1.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.14% | 4.69% | -3.55% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.73% | 6.29% | -4.56% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.43% | 7.66% | -5.23% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 2.07% | 11.48% | -9.41% |
IBTG.L vs. CNYB.L - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBTG.L has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than CNYB.L's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
IBTG.L vs. CNYB.L - Dividend Comparison
IBTG.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.87%, more than CNYB.L's 1.72% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CNYB.L iShares China CNY Bond UCITS ETF USD (Dist) | 1.72% | 1.89% | 2.24% | 2.55% | 2.72% | 2.74% | 2.65% | 0.72% | 0.00% |
IBTG.L iShares $ Treasury Bond 1-3yr UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist) | 3.87% | 4.08% | 4.12% | 2.92% | 0.76% | 0.59% | 1.66% | 2.35% | 0.78% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IBTG.L and CNYB.L have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IBTG.L is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IBTG.L is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for CNYB.L.
IBTG.L is categorized as Government Bonds, while CNYB.L is Emerging Markets Bonds. IBTG.L tracks iShares $ Treasury Bond 1-3yr UCITS ETF GBP Hedged (Dist), while CNYB.L tracks Bloomberg China Treasury + Policy Bank Index. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for IBTG.L and 0.35% for CNYB.L.
Find the right allocation for IBTG.L and CNYB.L
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