PA=F vs. TLT

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PA=F (Palladium) is an asset, while TLT (iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF) is Government Bonds fund tracking the ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index. At a 0.06 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

PA=F vs. TLT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Palladium (PA=F) and iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

PA=F

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

TLT

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: 2.20%
• YTD: 0.77%
• 6M: 0.38%
• 1Y: 3.87%
• 3Y*: -1.89%
• 5Y*: -6.59%
• 10Y*: -1.74%

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

PA=F vs. TLT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
PA=F Palladium	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	-4.98%
TLT iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF	0.77%	4.25%	-8.05%	2.77%	-28.80%

Correlation

The correlation between PA=F and TLT is 0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 31, 2022	0.06

Return for Risk

PA=F vs. TLT — Risk / Return Rank

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

PA=F

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

TLT

TLT Risk / Return Rank: 14
TLT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
TLT Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
TLT Omega Ratio Rank: 13
TLT Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
TLT Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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.

PA=F vs. TLT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Palladium (PA=F) and iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT). 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.

	PA=F	TLT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	0.41	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	0.66	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.07	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	0.51	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	1.22	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	PA=F	TLT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	—	-48.35%	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-7.58%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.18%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-43.70%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-48.35%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	—	-39.82%	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	—	-13.87%	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	3.18%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	PA=F	TLT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	2.20%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	6.62%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	9.48%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	15.82%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	14.88%	—

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PA=F and TLT in my portfolio?

PA=F and TLT have a correlation of 0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.