TMSF vs. BNDX
TMSF (T. Rowe Price Multi-Sector Income ETF) and BNDX (Vanguard Total International Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TMSF is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by T. Rowe Price, while BNDX is a Global Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Global Aggregate ex-USD Float Adjusted RIC Capped Index (USD Hedged). TMSF is actively managed, while BNDX is passively managed. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TMSF charges 0.37%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for BNDX.
Performance
TMSF vs. BNDX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TMSF achieves a 1.77% return, which is significantly higher than BNDX's 1.27% return.
TMSF
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- 0.55%
- YTD
- 1.77%
- 6M
- 2.12%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BNDX
- 1D
- 0.23%
- 1M
- 0.90%
- YTD
- 1.27%
- 6M
- 1.25%
- 1Y
- 2.23%
- 3Y*
- 4.22%
- 5Y*
- 0.46%
- 10Y*
- 1.74%
TMSF vs. BNDX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
TMSF T. Rowe Price Multi-Sector Income ETF | 1.77% | 1.29% |
BNDX Vanguard Total International Bond ETF | 1.27% | -0.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between TMSF and BNDX is 0.56, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 2025 | 0.56 |
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
TMSF vs. BNDX — Risk / Return Rank
TMSF
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
BNDX
TMSF vs. BNDX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for T. Rowe Price Multi-Sector Income ETF (TMSF) and Vanguard Total International Bond ETF (BNDX). 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.
| TMSF | BNDX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.12 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 0.76 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 2.11 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
TMSF vs. BNDX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TMSF drawdown since its inception was -2.28%, smaller than the maximum BNDX drawdown of -16.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMSF and BNDX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TMSF | BNDX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.28% | -16.23% | +13.95% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -2.93% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -2.93% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -15.86% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -16.23% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.35% | -0.77% | +0.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.37% | -3.10% | +2.73% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.06% | — |
Volatility
TMSF vs. BNDX - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TMSF | BNDX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.97% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 2.98% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.93% | 3.46% | -0.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.93% | 4.89% | -1.96% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 2.93% | 4.09% | -1.16% |
TMSF vs. BNDX - Expense Ratio Comparison
TMSF has a 0.37% expense ratio, which is higher than BNDX's 0.07% expense ratio.
Dividends
TMSF vs. BNDX - Dividend Comparison
TMSF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.06%, less than BNDX's 4.46% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BNDX Vanguard Total International Bond ETF | 4.46% | 4.39% | 4.18% | 4.42% | 1.51% | 3.74% | 1.11% | 3.40% | 3.01% | 2.23% | 1.89% | 1.63% |
TMSF T. Rowe Price Multi-Sector Income ETF | 3.06% | 0.75% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TMSF and BNDX have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BNDX is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BNDX is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.37% for TMSF.
BNDX has the higher dividend yield at 4.46%, compared with 3.06% for TMSF.
TMSF is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while BNDX is Global Bonds. They also come from different issuers: T. Rowe Price and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.37% for TMSF and 0.07% for BNDX.
Find the right allocation for TMSF and BNDX
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