TMSF vs. IAGG
TMSF (T. Rowe Price Multi-Sector Income ETF) and IAGG (iShares Core International Aggregate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TMSF is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by T. Rowe Price, while IAGG is a Global Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Global Aggregate ex USD 10% Issuer Capped (Hedged) Index. TMSF is actively managed, while IAGG is passively managed. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TMSF charges 0.37%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for IAGG.
Performance
TMSF vs. IAGG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TMSF achieves a 1.82% return, which is significantly higher than IAGG's 1.48% return.
TMSF
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- 0.60%
- YTD
- 1.82%
- 6M
- 2.21%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IAGG
- 1D
- -0.16%
- 1M
- 0.82%
- YTD
- 1.48%
- 6M
- 1.62%
- 1Y
- 2.53%
- 3Y*
- 4.71%
- 5Y*
- 1.23%
- 10Y*
- 2.19%
TMSF vs. IAGG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
TMSF T. Rowe Price Multi-Sector Income ETF | 1.82% | 1.29% |
IAGG iShares Core International Aggregate Bond ETF | 1.48% | -0.02% |
Correlation
The correlation between TMSF and IAGG is 0.59, 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 | 0.59 |
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. IAGG — Risk / Return Rank
TMSF
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
IAGG
TMSF vs. IAGG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for T. Rowe Price Multi-Sector Income ETF (TMSF) and iShares Core International Aggregate Bond ETF (IAGG). 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 | IAGG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.16 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.10 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 3.21 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
TMSF vs. IAGG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TMSF drawdown since its inception was -2.28%, smaller than the maximum IAGG drawdown of -13.88%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMSF and IAGG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TMSF | IAGG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.28% | -13.88% | +11.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -2.32% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -2.32% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -13.57% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -13.88% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.30% | -0.43% | +0.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.37% | -2.84% | +2.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.79% | — |
Volatility
TMSF vs. IAGG - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TMSF | IAGG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.74% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 2.46% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.94% | 2.87% | +0.07% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.94% | 4.51% | -1.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 2.94% | 4.05% | -1.11% |
TMSF vs. IAGG - Expense Ratio Comparison
TMSF has a 0.37% expense ratio, which is higher than IAGG's 0.07% expense ratio.
Dividends
TMSF vs. IAGG - Dividend Comparison
TMSF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.06%, less than IAGG's 3.64% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IAGG iShares Core International Aggregate Bond ETF | 3.64% | 3.08% | 4.28% | 3.55% | 2.27% | 1.16% | 1.95% | 2.82% | 3.02% | 1.74% | 1.56% | 0.13% |
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 IAGG have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IAGG is cheaper at 0.07% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IAGG is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.37% for TMSF.
IAGG has the higher dividend yield at 3.64%, compared with 3.06% for TMSF.
TMSF is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while IAGG is Global Bonds. They also come from different issuers: T. Rowe Price and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.37% for TMSF and 0.07% for IAGG.
Find the right allocation for TMSF and IAGG
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