ITDG vs. ITDB

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

ITDG (Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2055 ETF) and ITDB (Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2030 ETF) are both Target Retirement Date funds from iShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, ITDG returned 30.27% vs 17.29% for ITDB. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ITDG charges 0.11%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for ITDB.

Performance

ITDG vs. ITDB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2055 ETF (ITDG) and Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2030 ETF (ITDB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ITDG achieves a 12.93% return, which is significantly higher than ITDB's 6.83% return.

ITDG

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: 4.88%
• YTD: 12.93%
• 6M: 14.35%
• 1Y: 30.27%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ITDB

• 1D: 0.26%
• 1M: 2.55%
• YTD: 6.83%
• 6M: 7.45%
• 1Y: 17.29%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ITDG vs. ITDB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ITDG Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2055 ETF	12.93%	21.85%	16.56%	12.83%
ITDB Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2030 ETF	6.83%	14.58%	9.65%	11.73%

Correlation

The correlation between ITDG and ITDB is 0.95 - 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	0.95
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 20, 2023	0.94

The correlation between ITDG and ITDB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

ITDG vs. ITDB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ITDG	ITDB
Technology	27.1%	26.0%
Financial Services	16.1%	14.9%
Industrials	11.8%	12.3%
Consumer Cyclical	9.3%	8.9%
Healthcare	8.2%	7.6%
Communication Services	8.0%	8.0%
Consumer Defensive	4.8%	4.6%
Energy	4.3%	4.6%
Basic Materials	4.3%	3.9%
Real Estate	3.8%	5.4%
Utilities	2.6%	3.8%

Return for Risk

ITDG vs. ITDB — Risk / Return Rank

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

ITDG

ITDG Risk / Return Rank: 71
ITDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
ITDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
ITDG Omega Ratio Rank: 72
ITDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
ITDG Martin Ratio Rank: 74

ITDB

ITDB Risk / Return Rank: 71
ITDB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
ITDB Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
ITDB Omega Ratio Rank: 75
ITDB Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
ITDB Martin Ratio Rank: 72

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.

ITDG vs. ITDB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2055 ETF (ITDG) and Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2030 ETF (ITDB). 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.

	ITDG	ITDB	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.43	2.41	+0.02
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.36	3.44	-0.08
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.45	-0.02
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.25	3.11	+0.14
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	14.35	13.71	+0.64
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ITDG vs. ITDB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ITDG Sharpe Ratio is 2.43, which is comparable to the ITDB Sharpe Ratio of 2.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ITDG and ITDB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ITDG	ITDB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.43	2.41	+0.02
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.78	1.96	-0.18

Drawdowns

ITDG vs. ITDB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ITDG drawdown since its inception was -16.60%, which is greater than ITDB's maximum drawdown of -8.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ITDG and ITDB.

Drawdown Indicators

	ITDG	ITDB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.60%	-8.41%	-8.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.54%	-5.66%	-3.88%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.57%	-0.94%	-0.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.16%	1.28%	+0.88%

Volatility

ITDG vs. ITDB - Volatility Comparison

Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2055 ETF (ITDG) has a higher volatility of 3.81% compared to Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2030 ETF (ITDB) at 2.49%. This indicates that ITDG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ITDB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ITDG	ITDB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.81%	2.49%	+1.32%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.03%	5.90%	+4.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.52%	7.21%	+5.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.44%	8.61%	+5.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.44%	8.61%	+5.83%

ITDG vs. ITDB - Expense Ratio Comparison

ITDG has a 0.11% expense ratio, which is higher than ITDB's 0.09% 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

ITDG vs. ITDB - Dividend Comparison

ITDG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.42%, less than ITDB's 1.92% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
ITDB Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2030 ETF	1.92%	2.05%	1.96%	0.62%
ITDG Ishares Lifepath Target Date 2055 ETF	1.42%	1.60%	1.44%	0.84%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ITDG and ITDB in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.95, ITDG and ITDB 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.

Which is riskier, ITDG or ITDB?

ITDG has higher volatility (3.81%) compared to ITDB (2.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ITDG dropped -16.60% vs ITDB's -8.41%.

Which ETF is better, ITDG or ITDB?

On 1-year performance, ITDG leads with 30.27% vs 17.29% for ITDB. On fees, ITDB is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, ITDB has been the lower-risk option at 2.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ITDG or ITDB?

Over the 1-year period, ITDG has performed better with a 30.27% return vs 17.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ITDG or ITDB?

ITDB is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.11% for ITDG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ITDG or ITDB?

ITDB has the higher dividend yield at 1.92%, compared with 1.42% for ITDG.

What is the main difference between ITDG and ITDB?

Their fees differ too: 0.11% for ITDG and 0.09% for ITDB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ITDG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.43 vs 2.41), 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.