NUBD vs. VTG
NUBD (Nuveen ESG U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF) and VTG (Vanguard Total Treasury ETF) are both Intermediate Core Bond funds - NUBD tracks the Bloomberg MSCI U.S. Aggregate ESG Select Index while VTG tracks the Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Total Return Unhedged USD Index. Both are passively managed. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NUBD charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for VTG.
Performance
NUBD vs. VTG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, NUBD achieves a 0.20% return, which is significantly higher than VTG's -0.11% return.
NUBD
- 1D
- -0.18%
- 1M
- 0.31%
- YTD
- 0.20%
- 6M
- 0.09%
- 1Y
- 4.97%
- 3Y*
- 3.77%
- 5Y*
- -0.06%
- 10Y*
- —
VTG
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- 0.11%
- YTD
- -0.11%
- 6M
- -0.30%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
NUBD vs. VTG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
NUBD Nuveen ESG U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF | 0.20% | 3.33% |
VTG Vanguard Total Treasury ETF | -0.11% | 2.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between NUBD and VTG is 0.91, 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 Jul 10, 2025 | 0.91 |
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
NUBD vs. VTG — Risk / Return Rank
NUBD
VTG
NUBD vs. VTG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nuveen ESG U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NUBD) and Vanguard Total Treasury ETF (VTG). 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.
| NUBD | VTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.81 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.38 | — | — |
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
| NUBD | VTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.32 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.01 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.29 | 0.88 | -0.59 |
Drawdowns
NUBD vs. VTG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NUBD drawdown since its inception was -19.45%, which is greater than VTG's maximum drawdown of -2.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NUBD and VTG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NUBD | VTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.45% | -2.89% | -16.56% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.76% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.94% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.90% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.93% | -1.89% | -2.04% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.05% | -0.73% | -5.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.93% | — | — |
Volatility
NUBD vs. VTG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NUBD | VTG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.23% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.61% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.79% | 3.51% | +0.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.99% | 3.51% | +2.48% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.12% | 3.51% | +1.61% |
NUBD vs. VTG - Expense Ratio Comparison
NUBD has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than VTG's 0.03% 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
NUBD vs. VTG - Dividend Comparison
NUBD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.99%, more than VTG's 3.21% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NUBD Nuveen ESG U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF | 3.99% | 3.90% | 3.51% | 2.99% | 2.83% | 2.05% | 2.21% | 2.66% | 3.08% | 0.58% |
VTG Vanguard Total Treasury ETF | 3.21% | 1.65% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.91, NUBD and VTG 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, VTG is cheaper at 0.03% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
VTG is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for NUBD.
NUBD has the higher dividend yield at 3.99%, compared with 3.21% for VTG.
NUBD tracks Bloomberg MSCI U.S. Aggregate ESG Select Index, while VTG tracks Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Total Return Unhedged USD Index. They also come from different issuers: Nuveen and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for NUBD and 0.03% for VTG.
Find the right allocation for NUBD and VTG
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