PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IBTQ vs. VGIT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IBTQ vs. VGIT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds Dec 2035 Term Treasury ETF (IBTQ) and Vanguard Intermediate-Term Treasury ETF (VGIT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBTQ achieves a -0.68% return, which is significantly lower than VGIT's -0.32% return.


IBTQ

1D
-0.28%
1M
-0.05%
YTD
-0.68%
6M
-1.21%
1Y
4.35%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

VGIT

1D
0.14%
1M
-0.08%
YTD
-0.32%
6M
-0.27%
1Y
3.19%
3Y*
3.44%
5Y*
0.07%
10Y*
1.26%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IBTQ vs. VGIT - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between IBTQ and VGIT is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.96

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 27, 2025

0.96

The correlation between IBTQ and VGIT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.96 - 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

IBTQ vs. VGIT — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBTQ
IBTQ Risk / Return Rank: 2424
Overall Rank
IBTQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2525
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBTQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBTQ Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
IBTQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 2323
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBTQ Martin Ratio Rank: 2424
Martin Ratio Rank

VGIT
VGIT Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
VGIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2727
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VGIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
VGIT Omega Ratio Rank: 2525
Omega Ratio Rank
VGIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 2525
Calmar Ratio Rank
VGIT Martin Ratio Rank: 2525
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

IBTQ vs. VGIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2035 Term Treasury ETF (IBTQ) and Vanguard Intermediate-Term Treasury ETF (VGIT). 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.


IBTQVGITDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.09

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.13

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.17

-0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.02

1.13

-0.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.06

3.36

-0.31

IBTQ vs. VGIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBTQ Sharpe Ratio is 0.87, which is comparable to the VGIT Sharpe Ratio of 0.96. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBTQ and VGIT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IBTQVGITDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.87

0.96

-0.09

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.01

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.28

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.66

0.50

+0.16

Drawdowns

IBTQ vs. VGIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBTQ drawdown since its inception was -4.27%, smaller than the maximum VGIT drawdown of -16.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBTQ and VGIT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IBTQVGITDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-4.27%

-16.05%

+11.78%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.27%

-2.83%

-1.44%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-4.34%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-15.02%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-16.05%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.92%

-2.26%

-0.66%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.40%

-3.52%

+2.12%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.43%

0.95%

+0.48%

Volatility

IBTQ vs. VGIT - Volatility Comparison

iShares iBonds Dec 2035 Term Treasury ETF (IBTQ) has a higher volatility of 1.60% compared to Vanguard Intermediate-Term Treasury ETF (VGIT) at 1.06%. This indicates that IBTQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VGIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IBTQVGITDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.60%

1.06%

+0.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.47%

2.33%

+1.14%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.02%

3.38%

+1.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.62%

5.38%

+0.24%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.62%

4.50%

+1.12%

IBTQ vs. VGIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBTQ has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is higher than VGIT'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

IBTQ vs. VGIT - Dividend Comparison

IBTQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.72%, less than VGIT's 3.86% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IBTQ
iShares iBonds Dec 2035 Term Treasury ETF
3.72%2.80%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
VGIT
Vanguard Intermediate-Term Treasury ETF
3.86%3.79%3.67%2.73%1.74%1.69%2.23%2.24%2.05%1.67%1.69%1.69%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.96, IBTQ and VGIT 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.

IBTQ has higher volatility (1.60%) compared to VGIT (1.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBTQ dropped -4.27% vs VGIT's -16.05%.

On 1-year performance, IBTQ leads with 4.35% vs 3.19% for VGIT. On fees, VGIT is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, VGIT has been the lower-risk option at 1.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, IBTQ has performed better with a 4.35% return vs 3.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VGIT is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.07% for IBTQ.

VGIT has the higher dividend yield at 3.86%, compared with 3.72% for IBTQ.

IBTQ tracks ICE 2035 Maturity US Treasury Index, while VGIT tracks Bloomberg U.S. Treasury 3-10 Year Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for IBTQ and 0.03% for VGIT.

VGIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.96 vs 0.87), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IBTQ and VGIT

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