TDTT vs. ASMH
TDTT (FlexShares iBoxx 3-Year Target Duration TIPS Index Fund) and ASMH (ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TDTT is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the iBoxx 3-Year Target Duration TIPS, while ASMH is a Technology Equities fund tracking the ASML Holding NV Sponsored ADR. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, TDTT returned 4.65% vs 130.11% for ASMH. At a correlation of -0.16, they often move in opposite directions. TDTT charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for ASMH.
Performance
TDTT vs. ASMH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TDTT achieves a 1.81% return, which is significantly lower than ASMH's 63.99% return.
TDTT
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- -0.06%
- YTD
- 1.81%
- 6M
- 1.77%
- 1Y
- 4.65%
- 3Y*
- 5.00%
- 5Y*
- 2.85%
- 10Y*
- 3.11%
ASMH
- 1D
- 1.53%
- 1M
- 25.24%
- YTD
- 63.99%
- 6M
- 53.18%
- 1Y
- 130.11%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TDTT vs. ASMH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
TDTT FlexShares iBoxx 3-Year Target Duration TIPS Index Fund | 1.81% | 3.04% |
ASMH ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF | 63.99% | 58.84% |
Correlation
The correlation between TDTT and ASMH is -0.15, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.15 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 24, 2025 | -0.16 |
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
TDTT vs. ASMH — Risk / Return Rank
TDTT
ASMH
TDTT vs. ASMH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FlexShares iBoxx 3-Year Target Duration TIPS Index Fund (TDTT) and ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF (ASMH). 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.
| TDTT | ASMH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.82 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.39 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.51 | 1.47 | +0.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.17 | 8.24 | -3.07 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.59 | 21.26 | -4.67 |
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
| TDTT | ASMH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.54 | 3.36 | -0.82 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.78 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.92 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.69 | 3.59 | -2.90 |
Drawdowns
TDTT vs. ASMH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TDTT drawdown since its inception was -6.97%, smaller than the maximum ASMH drawdown of -15.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TDTT and ASMH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TDTT | ASMH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -6.97% | -15.89% | +8.92% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.90% | -15.89% | +14.99% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -1.53% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -6.97% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -6.97% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.14% | 0.00% | -0.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.60% | -4.33% | +2.73% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.28% | 6.14% | -5.86% |
Volatility
TDTT vs. ASMH - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for FlexShares iBoxx 3-Year Target Duration TIPS Index Fund (TDTT) is 0.46%, while ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF (ASMH) has a volatility of 13.84%. This indicates that TDTT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ASMH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TDTT | ASMH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.46% | 13.84% | -13.38% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.21% | 30.43% | -29.22% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.85% | 38.94% | -37.09% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.67% | 38.32% | -34.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.38% | 38.32% | -34.94% |
TDTT vs. ASMH - Expense Ratio Comparison
TDTT has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than ASMH's 0.19% 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
TDTT vs. ASMH - Dividend Comparison
TDTT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.54%, more than ASMH's 0.99% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASMH ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF | 0.99% | 0.19% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TDTT FlexShares iBoxx 3-Year Target Duration TIPS Index Fund | 4.54% | 4.52% | 4.01% | 3.88% | 6.97% | 4.53% | 1.15% | 1.91% | 2.48% | 1.88% | 1.01% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TDTT and ASMH have a correlation of -0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ASMH has higher volatility (13.84%) compared to TDTT (0.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TDTT dropped -6.97% vs ASMH's -15.89%.
On 1-year performance, ASMH leads with 130.11% vs 4.65% for TDTT. On fees, TDTT is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, TDTT has been the lower-risk option at 0.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, ASMH has performed better with a 130.11% return vs 4.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
TDTT is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for ASMH.
TDTT has the higher dividend yield at 4.54%, compared with 0.99% for ASMH.
TDTT is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while ASMH is Technology Equities. TDTT tracks iBoxx 3-Year Target Duration TIPS, while ASMH tracks ASML Holding NV Sponsored ADR. They also come from different issuers: Northern Trust and Precidian Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for TDTT and 0.19% for ASMH.
ASMH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.36 vs 2.54), 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 TDTT and ASMH
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