IRTR vs. AOM
IRTR (iShares LifePath Retirement ETF) and AOM (iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IRTR is a Target Retirement Date fund actively managed by iShares, while AOM is a Diversified Portfolio fund tracking the S&P Target Risk Moderate. IRTR is actively managed, while AOM is passively managed. Over the past year, IRTR returned 12.19% vs 12.57% for AOM. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IRTR charges 0.08%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for AOM.
Performance
IRTR vs. AOM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with IRTR having a 4.92% return and AOM slightly lower at 4.79%.
IRTR
- 1D
- 0.15%
- 1M
- -0.03%
- YTD
- 4.92%
- 6M
- 4.52%
- 1Y
- 12.19%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AOM
- 1D
- 0.22%
- 1M
- -0.06%
- YTD
- 4.79%
- 6M
- 4.29%
- 1Y
- 12.57%
- 3Y*
- 10.68%
- 5Y*
- 4.70%
- 10Y*
- 6.41%
IRTR vs. AOM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
IRTR iShares LifePath Retirement ETF | 4.92% | 12.70% | 7.59% | 11.03% |
AOM iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF | 4.79% | 13.28% | 7.95% | 9.61% |
Correlation
The correlation between IRTR and AOM is 0.94, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.94 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 19, 2023 | 0.94 |
The correlation between IRTR and AOM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.94 - 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
IRTR vs. AOM — Risk / Return Rank
IRTR
AOM
IRTR vs. AOM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares LifePath Retirement ETF (IRTR) and iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM). 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.
| IRTR | AOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.11 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.15 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.34 | +0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.54 | 2.47 | +0.07 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.97 | 10.61 | +0.36 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IRTR vs. AOM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IRTR drawdown since its inception was -6.29%, smaller than the maximum AOM drawdown of -19.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IRTR and AOM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IRTR | AOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -6.29% | -19.96% | +13.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.82% | -5.11% | +0.29% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -6.85% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -19.96% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -19.96% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.62% | -0.66% | +0.04% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.78% | -2.69% | +1.91% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.11% | 1.19% | -0.08% |
Volatility
IRTR vs. AOM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares LifePath Retirement ETF (IRTR) is 2.44%, while iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF (AOM) has a volatility of 2.71%. This indicates that IRTR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AOM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IRTR | AOM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.44% | 2.71% | -0.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.29% | 5.70% | -0.41% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.30% | 6.89% | -0.59% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.10% | 8.21% | -1.11% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.10% | 7.94% | -0.84% |
IRTR vs. AOM - Expense Ratio Comparison
IRTR has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is lower than AOM'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
IRTR vs. AOM - Dividend Comparison
IRTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.00%, which matches AOM's 2.99% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AOM iShares Core Moderate Allocation ETF | 2.99% | 2.98% | 3.10% | 2.79% | 2.27% | 1.56% | 2.02% | 2.66% | 2.53% | 3.31% | 2.14% | 1.98% |
IRTR iShares LifePath Retirement ETF | 3.00% | 3.03% | 3.03% | 0.85% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.94, IRTR and AOM 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.
AOM has higher volatility (2.71%) compared to IRTR (2.44%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IRTR dropped -6.29% vs AOM's -19.96%.
On 1-year performance, AOM leads with 12.57% vs 12.19% for IRTR. On fees, IRTR is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, IRTR has been the lower-risk option at 2.44%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, AOM has performed better with a 12.57% return vs 12.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IRTR is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for AOM.
IRTR and AOM have nearly identical dividend yields, around 3.00%.
IRTR is categorized as Target Retirement Date, while AOM is Diversified Portfolio. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for IRTR and 0.25% for AOM.
IRTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.94 vs 1.83), 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.
Find the right allocation for IRTR and AOM
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