QLTA vs. IBIT
QLTA (iShares Aaa - A Rated Corporate Bond ETF) and IBIT (iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QLTA is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg U.S. Corporate Aaa - A Capped Index, while IBIT is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate - New York Variant. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, QLTA returned 1.46% vs -43.69% for IBIT. Their 0.09 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. QLTA charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for IBIT.
Performance
QLTA vs. IBIT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QLTA achieves a -0.81% return, which is significantly higher than IBIT's -27.17% return.
QLTA
- 1D
- 0.24%
- 1M
- -1.48%
- 6M
- -0.94%
- YTD
- -0.81%
- 1Y
- 1.46%
- 3Y*
- 4.29%
- 5Y*
- -0.68%
- 10Y*
- 1.71%
- ALL TIME*
- 2.42%
IBIT
- 1D
- 1.46%
- 1M
- 3.70%
- 6M
- -18.23%
- YTD
- -27.17%
- 1Y
- -43.69%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 10.60%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $1.33B | $1.34B | $1.65B | |
| $10.45M | $12.51M | $17.34M |
QLTA vs. IBIT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
QLTA iShares Aaa - A Rated Corporate Bond ETF | -0.81% | 7.36% | 2.12% |
IBIT iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF | -27.17% | -6.41% | 89.87% |
Correlation
The correlation between QLTA and IBIT is 0.18, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.18 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024 | 0.09 |
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
QLTA vs. IBIT — Risk / Return Rank
QLTA
IBIT
QLTA vs. IBIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Aaa - A Rated Corporate Bond ETF (QLTA) and iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT). 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.
| QLTA | IBIT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.33 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.95 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.06 | 0.84 | +0.22 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.52 | -0.82 | +1.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.31 | -1.26 | +2.57 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
QLTA vs. IBIT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QLTA drawdown since its inception was -22.27%, smaller than the maximum IBIT drawdown of -53.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QLTA and IBIT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QLTA | IBIT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.27% | -53.30% | +31.03% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.81% | -53.30% | +50.49% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.36% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -21.28% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -22.27% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.49% | -49.28% | +44.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.66% | -18.29% | +13.63% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.11% | 34.80% | -33.69% |
Volatility
QLTA vs. IBIT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Aaa - A Rated Corporate Bond ETF (QLTA) is 1.21%, while iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT) has a volatility of 8.98%. This indicates that QLTA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IBIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QLTA | IBIT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.21% | 8.98% | -7.77% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.41% | 33.79% | -30.38% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.26% | 44.48% | -40.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.22% | 49.57% | -42.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.02% | 49.57% | -42.55% |
QLTA vs. IBIT - Expense Ratio Comparison
QLTA has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than IBIT's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
QLTA vs. IBIT - Dividend Comparison
QLTA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.60%, while IBIT has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBIT iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QLTA iShares Aaa - A Rated Corporate Bond ETF | 4.60% | 4.33% | 4.11% | 3.39% | 2.79% | 1.96% | 2.31% | 2.99% | 3.09% | 2.67% | 2.59% | 2.99% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QLTA and IBIT have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IBIT has higher volatility (8.98%) compared to QLTA (1.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QLTA dropped -22.27% vs IBIT's -53.30%.
On 1-year performance, QLTA leads with 1.46% vs -43.69% for IBIT. On fees, QLTA is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QLTA has been the lower-risk option at 1.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, QLTA has performed better with a 1.46% return vs -43.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QLTA is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for IBIT.
QLTA has the higher dividend yield at 4.60%, compared with 0.00% for IBIT.
QLTA is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while IBIT is Cryptocurrency. QLTA tracks Bloomberg U.S. Corporate Aaa - A Capped Index, while IBIT tracks CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate - New York Variant. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for QLTA and 0.25% for IBIT.
QLTA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.34 vs -0.99), 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 QLTA and IBIT
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