ILTB vs. PCL
ILTB (iShares Core 10+ Year USD Bond ETF) and PCL (PGIM Corporate Bond 10+ Year ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ILTB is a Long-Term Bond fund tracking the Bloomberg U.S. Universal 10+ Year Index (USD), while PCL is a Corporate Bonds fund actively managed by PGIM. ILTB is passively managed, while PCL is actively managed. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. ILTB charges 0.06%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for PCL.
Performance
ILTB vs. PCL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ILTB achieves a 2.02% return, which is significantly lower than PCL's 2.74% return.
ILTB
- 1D
- 1.00%
- 1M
- 2.84%
- YTD
- 2.02%
- 6M
- 1.36%
- 1Y
- 6.37%
- 3Y*
- 3.02%
- 5Y*
- -2.88%
- 10Y*
- 1.33%
PCL
- 1D
- 0.67%
- 1M
- 2.25%
- YTD
- 2.74%
- 6M
- 1.99%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ILTB vs. PCL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ILTB iShares Core 10+ Year USD Bond ETF | 2.02% | 3.71% |
PCL PGIM Corporate Bond 10+ Year ETF | 2.74% | 2.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between ILTB and PCL 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 1, 2025 | 0.96 |
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
ILTB vs. PCL — Risk / Return Rank
ILTB
PCL
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ILTB vs. PCL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core 10+ Year USD Bond ETF (ILTB) and PGIM Corporate Bond 10+ Year ETF (PCL). 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.
| ILTB | PCL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.14 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.18 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.91 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ILTB vs. PCL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ILTB drawdown since its inception was -36.88%, which is greater than PCL's maximum drawdown of -5.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILTB and PCL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ILTB | PCL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.88% | -5.14% | -31.74% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.42% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.60% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -35.22% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.88% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -19.93% | -0.24% | -19.69% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.96% | -1.72% | -8.24% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.19% | — | — |
Volatility
ILTB vs. PCL - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ILTB | PCL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.08% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.76% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.78% | 7.85% | -0.07% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.62% | 7.85% | +4.77% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.57% | 7.85% | +3.72% |
ILTB vs. PCL - Expense Ratio Comparison
ILTB has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than PCL's 0.25% 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
ILTB vs. PCL - Dividend Comparison
ILTB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.87%, less than PCL's 5.24% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ILTB iShares Core 10+ Year USD Bond ETF | 4.87% | 4.83% | 4.91% | 4.38% | 4.31% | 3.04% | 3.32% | 3.45% | 4.13% | 3.97% | 3.99% | 4.20% |
PCL PGIM Corporate Bond 10+ Year ETF | 5.24% | 2.52% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.96, ILTB and PCL 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.
On fees, ILTB is cheaper at 0.06% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ILTB is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for PCL.
PCL has the higher dividend yield at 5.24%, compared with 4.87% for ILTB.
ILTB is categorized as Long-Term Bond, while PCL is Corporate Bonds. They also come from different issuers: iShares and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.06% for ILTB and 0.25% for PCL.
Find the right allocation for ILTB and PCL
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