PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
ILCG vs. BIV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

ILCG vs. BIV

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

ILCG (iShares Morningstar Growth ETF) and BIV (Vanguard Intermediate-Term Bond Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ILCG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross, while BIV is a Intermediate Core Bond fund tracking the Bloomberg U.S. 5–10 Year Government/Credit Float Adjusted Bond Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, ILCG returned 17.83%/yr vs 1.83%/yr for BIV. At a correlation of -0.13, they often move in opposite directions. ILCG charges 0.04%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for BIV.

Performance

ILCG vs. BIV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) and Vanguard Intermediate-Term Bond Index ETF (BIV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ILCG achieves a 10.48% return, which is significantly higher than BIV's -0.67% return. Over the past 10 years, ILCG has outperformed BIV with an annualized return of 17.83%, while BIV has yielded a comparatively lower 1.83% annualized return.

ILCG

1D
0.76%
1M
0.01%
YTD
10.48%
6M
9.79%
1Y
24.11%
3Y*
25.09%
5Y*
14.03%
10Y*
17.83%

BIV

1D
-0.05%
1M
-0.94%
YTD
-0.67%
6M
-0.33%
1Y
4.70%
3Y*
4.27%
5Y*
0.08%
10Y*
1.83%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ILCG vs. BIV - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ILCG
iShares Morningstar Growth ETF		10.48%16.71%32.82%40.41%-31.75%24.33%38.56%33.22%2.06%30.57%
BIV
Vanguard Intermediate-Term Bond Index ETF		-0.67%8.52%1.57%6.07%-13.21%-2.40%9.67%10.34%-0.19%3.65%

Correlation

The correlation between ILCG and BIV is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.23

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.17

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.16

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.07

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2007

-0.13

The correlation between ILCG and BIV shifts across timeframes, from -0.13 (all time) to 0.23 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Morningstar Growth ETF

Vanguard Intermediate-Term Bond Index ETF

Often compared with ILCG:
ILCG vs. SCHGILCG vs. IUSGILCG vs. VUGILCG vs. QQQILCG vs. ILCBILCG vs. VOOILCG vs. MGK
Often compared with BIV:
BIV vs. BNDBIV vs. BLVBIV vs. VFICXBIV vs. SCHPBIV vs. BNDXBIV vs. VGSHBIV vs. AGG

Return for Risk

ILCG vs. BIV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
ILCG
ILCG Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
ILCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ILCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
ILCG Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
ILCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
ILCG Martin Ratio Rank: 3838
Martin Ratio Rank
BIV
BIV Risk / Return Rank: 3434
Overall Rank
BIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
BIV Omega Ratio Rank: 3333
Omega Ratio Rank
BIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 3333
Calmar Ratio Rank
BIV Martin Ratio Rank: 3232
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.

ILCG vs. BIV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) and Vanguard Intermediate-Term Bond Index ETF (BIV). 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.

ILCGBIVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.44
1.18

+0.26

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.94
1.76

+0.18

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.21

+0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.55

1.49

+0.06

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.43

4.40

+1.03

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ILCG vs. BIV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ILCG Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is comparable to the BIV Sharpe Ratio of 1.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ILCG and BIV, 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

ILCGBIVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.44

1.18

+0.26

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.64

0.01

+0.63

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.83

0.33

+0.50

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.58

0.64

-0.06

Drawdowns

ILCG vs. BIV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ILCG drawdown since its inception was -52.98%, which is greater than BIV's maximum drawdown of -18.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILCG and BIV.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

ILCGBIVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-52.98%

-18.95%

-34.03%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.65%

-3.18%

-12.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.10%

-6.07%

-17.03%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.38%

-18.74%

-16.64%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.38%

-18.95%

-16.43%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.48%

-2.46%

-2.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.22%

-3.39%

-4.83%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.45%

1.07%

+3.38%

Volatility

ILCG vs. BIV - Volatility Comparison

iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) has a higher volatility of 6.01% compared to Vanguard Intermediate-Term Bond Index ETF (BIV) at 1.35%. This indicates that ILCG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BIV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

ILCGBIVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.01%

1.35%

+4.66%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.55%

2.93%

+10.62%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.85%

4.00%

+12.85%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.08%

6.40%

+15.68%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.58%

5.51%

+16.07%

ILCG vs. BIV - Expense Ratio Comparison

ILCG has a 0.04% expense ratio, which is higher than BIV'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

ILCG vs. BIV - Dividend Comparison

ILCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.42%, less than BIV's 4.24% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BIV
Vanguard Intermediate-Term Bond Index ETF		4.24%4.01%3.79%3.09%2.41%3.42%2.95%2.75%2.88%2.69%3.01%3.02%
ILCG
iShares Morningstar Growth ETF		0.42%0.47%0.50%0.69%0.75%0.34%0.28%0.54%0.81%0.89%0.95%0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions

ILCG and BIV have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ILCG has higher volatility (6.01%) compared to BIV (1.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ILCG dropped -52.98% vs BIV's -18.95%.

On 10-year performance, ILCG leads with 17.83% vs 1.83% for BIV. On fees, BIV is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, BIV has been the lower-risk option at 1.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ILCG has performed better with a 17.83% return vs 1.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BIV is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.04% for ILCG.

BIV has the higher dividend yield at 4.24%, compared with 0.42% for ILCG.

ILCG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while BIV is Intermediate Core Bond. ILCG tracks Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Growth Index Gross, while BIV tracks Bloomberg U.S. 5–10 Year Government/Credit Float Adjusted Bond Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.04% for ILCG and 0.03% for BIV.

ILCG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.44 vs 1.18), 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 ILCG and BIV

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