IMTG vs. GNMA
IMTG (Invesco Agency MBS ETF) and GNMA (iShares GNMA Bond ETF) are both Mortgage Backed Securities funds. IMTG is actively managed, while GNMA is passively managed. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IMTG charges 0.22%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for GNMA.
Performance
IMTG vs. GNMA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
IMTG
- 1D
- 0.10%
- 1M
- 0.91%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GNMA
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- 0.97%
- YTD
- 1.44%
- 6M
- 1.55%
- 1Y
- 5.74%
- 3Y*
- 4.36%
- 5Y*
- 0.75%
- 10Y*
- 1.23%
IMTG vs. GNMA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
IMTG Invesco Agency MBS ETF | -0.35% |
GNMA iShares GNMA Bond ETF | -0.28% |
Correlation
The correlation between IMTG and GNMA is 0.89, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2026 | 0.89 |
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
IMTG vs. GNMA — Risk / Return Rank
IMTG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
GNMA
IMTG vs. GNMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Agency MBS ETF (IMTG) and iShares GNMA Bond ETF (GNMA). 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.
| IMTG | GNMA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.24 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.20 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 6.60 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IMTG vs. GNMA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IMTG drawdown since its inception was -2.85%, smaller than the maximum GNMA drawdown of -17.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMTG and GNMA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IMTG | GNMA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.85% | -17.09% | +14.24% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -2.61% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -7.12% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -15.83% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -17.09% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.74% | -0.54% | -0.20% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.38% | -3.65% | +2.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.87% | — |
Volatility
IMTG vs. GNMA - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IMTG | GNMA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 1.32% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 3.29% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.72% | 4.26% | +0.46% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.72% | 6.63% | -1.91% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.72% | 5.14% | -0.42% |
IMTG vs. GNMA - Expense Ratio Comparison
IMTG has a 0.22% expense ratio, which is higher than GNMA's 0.15% 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
IMTG vs. GNMA - Dividend Comparison
IMTG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.28%, less than GNMA's 4.20% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GNMA iShares GNMA Bond ETF | 4.20% | 4.19% | 4.15% | 3.43% | 2.01% | 0.64% | 1.89% | 2.61% | 2.41% | 2.15% | 1.89% | 1.50% |
IMTG Invesco Agency MBS ETF | 1.28% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IMTG and GNMA have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GNMA is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GNMA is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.22% for IMTG.
GNMA has the higher dividend yield at 4.20%, compared with 1.28% for IMTG.
They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.22% for IMTG and 0.15% for GNMA.
Find the right allocation for IMTG and GNMA
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