PAB vs. IBTM

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

PAB (PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF) and IBTM (iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF) are both Intermediate Core Bond funds. PAB is actively managed, while IBTM is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, PAB returned 4.41%/yr vs 2.71%/yr for IBTM. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. PAB charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for IBTM.

Performance

PAB vs. IBTM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF (PAB) and iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF (IBTM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PAB achieves a 0.34% return, which is significantly higher than IBTM's -0.61% return.

PAB

• 1D: -0.24%
• 1M: 0.57%
• YTD: 0.34%
• 6M: 0.51%
• 1Y: 4.77%
• 3Y*: 4.41%
• 5Y*: 0.12%
• 10Y*: —

IBTM

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: 0.33%
• YTD: -0.61%
• 6M: -0.56%
• 1Y: 3.09%
• 3Y*: 2.71%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PAB vs. IBTM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
PAB PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF	0.34%	7.55%	1.89%	6.37%	-3.04%
IBTM iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF	-0.61%	8.06%	-0.14%	3.48%	-5.01%

Correlation

The correlation between PAB and IBTM 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 8, 2022	0.96

The correlation between PAB and IBTM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PAB vs. IBTM — Risk / Return Rank

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

PAB

PAB Risk / Return Rank: 35
PAB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
PAB Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
PAB Omega Ratio Rank: 33
PAB Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
PAB Martin Ratio Rank: 33

IBTM

IBTM Risk / Return Rank: 21
IBTM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
IBTM Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
IBTM Omega Ratio Rank: 19
IBTM Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
IBTM Martin Ratio Rank: 21

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.

PAB vs. IBTM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF (PAB) 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.

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.

	PAB	IBTM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.25	0.77	+0.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.88	1.16	+0.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.13	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.67	0.95	+0.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.76	2.51	+2.25

PAB vs. IBTM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PAB Sharpe Ratio is 1.25, which is higher than the IBTM Sharpe Ratio of 0.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PAB and IBTM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

PAB vs. IBTM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PAB drawdown since its inception was -19.27%, which is greater than IBTM's maximum drawdown of -13.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PAB and IBTM.

Drawdown Indicators

	PAB	IBTM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.27%	-13.60%	-5.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.86%	-3.26%	+0.40%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-5.95%	-7.86%	+1.91%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.27%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.54%	-2.49%	+0.95%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.77%	-4.78%	-2.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.01%	1.23%	-0.22%

Volatility

PAB vs. IBTM - Volatility Comparison

PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF (PAB) and iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF (IBTM) have volatilities of 1.22% and 1.23%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	PAB	IBTM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.22%	1.23%	-0.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.88%	2.89%	-0.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.85%	4.05%	-0.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.22%	7.53%	-1.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.14%	7.53%	-1.39%

PAB vs. IBTM - Expense Ratio Comparison

PAB 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

PAB vs. IBTM - Dividend Comparison

PAB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.56%, more than IBTM's 3.96% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IBTM iShares iBonds Dec 2032 Term Treasury ETF	3.96%	3.87%	3.96%	3.39%	1.38%	0.00%
PAB PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF	4.56%	4.28%	4.25%	3.70%	2.81%	2.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PAB and IBTM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, PAB and IBTM 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, PAB or IBTM?

IBTM has higher volatility (1.23%) compared to PAB (1.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PAB dropped -19.27% vs IBTM's -13.60%.

Which ETF is better, PAB or IBTM?

On 3-year performance, PAB leads with 4.41% vs 2.71% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, PAB or IBTM?

Over the 3-year period, PAB has performed better with a 4.41% return vs 2.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PAB or IBTM?

IBTM is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for PAB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PAB or IBTM?

PAB has the higher dividend yield at 4.56%, compared with 3.96% for IBTM.

What is the main difference between PAB and IBTM?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for PAB and 0.07% for IBTM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PAB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.25 vs 0.77), 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.