NUAG vs. IBTM
NUAG (Nuveen Enhanced Yield U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF) and IBTM (iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF) are both Intermediate Core Bond funds - NUAG tracks the ICE BofA Enhanced Yield US Broad Bond while IBTM tracks the ICE 2032 Maturity US Treasury Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, NUAG returned 4.89%/yr vs 2.68%/yr for IBTM. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NUAG charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for IBTM.
Performance
NUAG vs. IBTM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NUAG achieves a 0.50% return, which is significantly higher than IBTM's -0.50% return.
NUAG
- 1D
- -0.19%
- 1M
- 0.41%
- YTD
- 0.50%
- 6M
- 0.32%
- 1Y
- 5.90%
- 3Y*
- 4.89%
- 5Y*
- 0.47%
- 10Y*
- —
IBTM
- 1D
- -0.18%
- 1M
- -0.15%
- YTD
- -0.50%
- 6M
- -0.81%
- 1Y
- 3.93%
- 3Y*
- 2.68%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NUAG vs. IBTM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NUAG Nuveen Enhanced Yield U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF | 0.50% | 7.37% | 2.02% | 7.52% | -2.31% |
IBTM iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF | -0.50% | 8.06% | -0.14% | 3.48% | -4.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between NUAG and IBTM is 0.90, 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 | 0.90 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.93 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 11, 2022 | 0.93 |
The correlation between NUAG and IBTM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.93 - 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
NUAG vs. IBTM — Risk / Return Rank
NUAG
IBTM
NUAG vs. IBTM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nuveen Enhanced Yield U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NUAG) and iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF (IBTM). 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.
| NUAG | IBTM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.69 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.02 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.17 | +0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.33 | 1.21 | +1.12 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.06 | 3.51 | +3.55 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| NUAG | IBTM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.65 | 0.96 | +0.69 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.08 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.31 | 0.20 | +0.11 |
Drawdowns
NUAG vs. IBTM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NUAG drawdown since its inception was -19.79%, which is greater than IBTM's maximum drawdown of -13.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NUAG and IBTM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NUAG | IBTM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.79% | -13.60% | -6.19% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.54% | -3.26% | +0.72% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.61% | -7.86% | +2.25% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.19% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.23% | -2.38% | +1.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.95% | -4.82% | -0.13% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.84% | 1.12% | -0.28% |
Volatility
NUAG vs. IBTM - Volatility Comparison
Nuveen Enhanced Yield U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NUAG) and iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF (IBTM) have volatilities of 1.15% and 1.20%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NUAG | IBTM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.15% | 1.20% | -0.05% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.59% | 2.75% | -0.16% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.58% | 4.09% | -0.51% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.01% | 7.56% | -1.55% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.49% | 7.56% | -2.07% |
NUAG vs. IBTM - Expense Ratio Comparison
NUAG has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than IBTM's 0.07% 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
NUAG vs. IBTM - Dividend Comparison
NUAG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.50%, more than IBTM's 3.95% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBTM iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF | 3.95% | 3.87% | 3.96% | 3.39% | 1.38% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
NUAG Nuveen Enhanced Yield U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF | 4.50% | 4.43% | 4.44% | 3.95% | 3.60% | 2.27% | 2.93% | 3.54% | 3.79% | 3.38% | 0.48% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NUAG and IBTM have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IBTM has higher volatility (1.20%) compared to NUAG (1.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NUAG dropped -19.79% vs IBTM's -13.60%.
On 3-year performance, NUAG leads with 4.89% vs 2.68% for IBTM. On fees, IBTM is cheaper at 0.07% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, NUAG has performed better with a 4.89% return vs 2.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IBTM is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for NUAG.
NUAG has the higher dividend yield at 4.50%, compared with 3.95% for IBTM.
NUAG tracks ICE BofA Enhanced Yield US Broad Bond, while IBTM tracks ICE 2032 Maturity US Treasury Index. They also come from different issuers: Nuveen and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for NUAG and 0.07% for IBTM.
NUAG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.65 vs 0.96), 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 NUAG and IBTM
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