IBTM vs. PAB

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

IBTM (iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF) and PAB (PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF) are both Intermediate Core Bond funds. IBTM is passively managed, while PAB is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, IBTM returned 3.23%/yr vs 4.39%/yr for PAB. Their 0.96 correlation means they have historically moved very closely together. IBTM charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for PAB.

Performance

IBTM vs. PAB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF (IBTM) and PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF (PAB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBTM achieves a -0.90% return, which is significantly lower than PAB's -0.44% return.

IBTM

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: -0.86%
• 6M: -0.82%
• YTD: -0.90%
• 1Y: 1.00%
• 3Y*: 3.23%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 1.24%

PAB

• 1D: -0.33%
• 1M: -1.08%
• 6M: -0.70%
• YTD: -0.44%
• 1Y: 2.13%
• 3Y*: 4.39%
• 5Y*: -0.31%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 0.08%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
IBTM iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF	$2.40M	$2.20M	$2.73M
PAB PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF	$386.36K	$333.07K	$1.06M

IBTM vs. PAB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
IBTM iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF	-0.90%	8.06%	-0.14%	3.48%	-5.01%
PAB PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF	-0.44%	7.55%	1.89%	6.37%	-3.04%

Correlation

The correlation between IBTM and PAB is 0.90, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.90
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 8, 2022	0.96

The correlation between IBTM and PAB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

IBTM vs. PAB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

IBTM

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

PAB

PAB Risk / Return Rank: 31
PAB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
PAB Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
PAB Omega Ratio Rank: 29
PAB Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
PAB Martin Ratio Rank: 30

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IBTM vs. PAB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF (IBTM) and PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF (PAB). 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.

	IBTM	PAB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.55	0.80	-0.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.83	1.18	-0.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	1.14	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.66	1.07	-0.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.49	2.68	-1.19

IBTM vs. PAB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBTM Sharpe Ratio is 0.55, which is lower than the PAB Sharpe Ratio of 0.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBTM and PAB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

IBTM vs. PAB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBTM drawdown since its inception was -13.60%, smaller than the maximum PAB drawdown of -19.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBTM and PAB.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBTM	PAB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.60%	-19.27%	+5.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.26%	-2.86%	-0.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-6.33%	-5.02%	-1.31%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.24%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.78%	-2.30%	-0.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.72%	-7.64%	+2.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.44%	1.14%	+0.30%

Volatility

IBTM vs. PAB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF (IBTM) is 0.91%, while PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF (PAB) has a volatility of 1.19%. This indicates that IBTM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PAB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IBTM	PAB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.91%	1.19%	-0.28%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.98%	3.08%	-0.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.93%	3.83%	+0.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.45%	6.21%	+1.24%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.45%	6.10%	+1.35%

IBTM vs. PAB - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBTM has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than PAB's 0.19% 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. PAB - Dividend Comparison

IBTM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.96%, less than PAB's 5.03% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IBTM iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF	3.62%	3.87%	3.96%	3.39%	1.38%	0.00%
PAB PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF	4.65%	4.28%	4.25%	3.70%	2.81%	2.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBTM and PAB in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, IBTM and PAB 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.

Which is riskier, IBTM or PAB?

PAB has higher volatility (1.19%) compared to IBTM (0.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBTM dropped -13.60% vs PAB's -19.27%.

Which ETF is better, IBTM or PAB?

On 3-year performance, PAB leads with 4.39% vs 3.23% for IBTM. On fees, IBTM is cheaper at 0.07% per year. On volatility, IBTM has been the lower-risk option at 0.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IBTM or PAB?

Over the 3-year period, PAB has performed better with a 4.39% return vs 3.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBTM or PAB?

IBTM is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for PAB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBTM or PAB?

PAB has the higher dividend yield at 4.65%, compared with 3.62% for IBTM.

What is the main difference between IBTM and PAB?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for IBTM and 0.19% for PAB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PAB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.80 vs 0.55), 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.