IBTM vs. NUBD
IBTM (iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF) and NUBD (Nuveen ESG U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF) are both Intermediate Core Bond funds - IBTM tracks the ICE 2032 Maturity US Treasury Index while NUBD tracks the Bloomberg MSCI U.S. Aggregate ESG Select Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, IBTM returned 2.74%/yr vs 3.82%/yr for NUBD. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IBTM charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for NUBD.
Performance
IBTM vs. NUBD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IBTM achieves a -0.36% return, which is significantly lower than NUBD's 0.36% return.
IBTM
- 1D
- 0.13%
- 1M
- -0.11%
- YTD
- -0.36%
- 6M
- -0.38%
- 1Y
- 3.43%
- 3Y*
- 2.74%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NUBD
- 1D
- 0.16%
- 1M
- 0.30%
- YTD
- 0.36%
- 6M
- 0.43%
- 1Y
- 4.51%
- 3Y*
- 3.82%
- 5Y*
- -0.03%
- 10Y*
- —
IBTM vs. NUBD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBTM iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF | -0.36% | 8.06% | -0.14% | 3.48% | -4.63% |
NUBD Nuveen ESG U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF | 0.36% | 6.75% | 1.31% | 5.42% | -2.86% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBTM and NUBD is 0.91, 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 | 0.91 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.93 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 11, 2022 | 0.94 |
The correlation between IBTM and NUBD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.94 - 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
IBTM vs. NUBD — Risk / Return Rank
IBTM
NUBD
IBTM vs. NUBD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF (IBTM) and Nuveen ESG U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NUBD). 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.
| IBTM | NUBD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.36 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.48 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.15 | 1.21 | -0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.05 | 1.64 | -0.59 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.04 | 4.87 | -1.83 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IBTM | NUBD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.85 | 1.21 | -0.36 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | -0.01 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.20 | 0.29 | -0.09 |
Drawdowns
IBTM vs. NUBD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBTM drawdown since its inception was -13.60%, smaller than the maximum NUBD drawdown of -19.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBTM and NUBD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBTM | NUBD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.60% | -19.45% | +5.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.26% | -2.76% | -0.50% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.86% | -5.94% | -1.92% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -17.90% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.25% | -3.77% | +1.52% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.82% | -6.05% | +1.23% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.13% | 0.93% | +0.20% |
Volatility
IBTM vs. NUBD - Volatility Comparison
iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF (IBTM) and Nuveen ESG U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NUBD) have volatilities of 1.20% and 1.22%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBTM | NUBD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.20% | 1.22% | -0.02% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.75% | 2.62% | +0.13% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.09% | 3.79% | +0.30% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.55% | 5.99% | +1.56% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.55% | 5.12% | +2.43% |
IBTM vs. NUBD - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBTM has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than NUBD'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
IBTM vs. NUBD - Dividend Comparison
IBTM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.95%, which matches NUBD's 3.98% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBTM iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF | 3.95% | 3.87% | 3.96% | 3.39% | 1.38% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
NUBD Nuveen ESG U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF | 3.98% | 3.90% | 3.51% | 2.99% | 2.83% | 2.05% | 2.21% | 2.66% | 3.08% | 0.58% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.91, IBTM and NUBD move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
NUBD has higher volatility (1.22%) compared to IBTM (1.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBTM dropped -13.60% vs NUBD's -19.45%.
On 3-year performance, NUBD leads with 3.82% vs 2.74% for IBTM. On fees, IBTM is cheaper at 0.07% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, NUBD has performed better with a 3.82% return vs 2.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IBTM is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for NUBD.
NUBD has the higher dividend yield at 3.98%, compared with 3.95% for IBTM.
IBTM tracks ICE 2032 Maturity US Treasury Index, while NUBD tracks Bloomberg MSCI U.S. Aggregate ESG Select Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Nuveen. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for IBTM and 0.15% for NUBD.
NUBD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.21 vs 0.85), 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 IBTM and NUBD
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