TRBF vs. GTO
TRBF (Angel Oak Total Return ETF) and GTO (Invesco Total Return Bond ETF) are both Intermediate Core-Plus Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.83 means they have usually moved in the same direction. TRBF charges 0.44%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for GTO.
Performance
TRBF vs. GTO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TRBF achieves a -0.10% return, which is significantly higher than GTO's -0.23% return.
TRBF
- 1D
- -0.34%
- 1M
- -1.13%
- 6M
- -0.50%
- YTD
- -0.10%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
GTO
- 1D
- -0.22%
- 1M
- -1.23%
- 6M
- -0.66%
- YTD
- -0.23%
- 1Y
- 2.89%
- 3Y*
- 4.56%
- 5Y*
- -0.44%
- 10Y*
- 2.60%
- ALL TIME*
- 2.95%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $9.60M | $9.43M | $10.69M | |
| $289.91K | $447.70K | $231.20K |
TRBF vs. GTO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
TRBF Angel Oak Total Return ETF | -0.10% | 0.94% |
GTO Invesco Total Return Bond ETF | -0.23% | 0.94% |
Correlation
The correlation between TRBF and GTO is 0.83, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 7, 2025 | 0.83 |
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
TRBF vs. GTO — Risk / Return Rank
TRBF
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
GTO
TRBF vs. GTO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Angel Oak Total Return ETF (TRBF) and Invesco Total Return Bond ETF (GTO). 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.
| TRBF | GTO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.19 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.33 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 3.63 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
TRBF vs. GTO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TRBF drawdown since its inception was -2.59%, smaller than the maximum GTO drawdown of -20.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TRBF and GTO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TRBF | GTO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.59% | -20.61% | +18.02% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -2.73% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -5.06% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -20.61% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -20.61% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.09% | -2.52% | +0.43% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.89% | -4.75% | +3.86% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.00% | — |
Volatility
TRBF vs. GTO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TRBF | GTO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.90% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 2.68% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.73% | 3.38% | +0.35% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.73% | 5.67% | -1.94% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.73% | 5.52% | -1.79% |
TRBF vs. GTO - Expense Ratio Comparison
TRBF has a 0.44% expense ratio, which is higher than GTO's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
TRBF vs. GTO - Dividend Comparison
TRBF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.03%, less than GTO's 4.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GTO Invesco Total Return Bond ETF | 4.91% | 4.70% | 4.42% | 4.05% | 3.47% | 1.93% | 4.04% | 2.97% | 5.25% | 2.81% | 2.57% |
TRBF Angel Oak Total Return ETF | 4.03% | 1.16% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TRBF and GTO have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, GTO is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GTO is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.44% for TRBF.
GTO has the higher dividend yield at 4.91%, compared with 4.03% for TRBF.
They also come from different issuers: Angel Oak and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.44% for TRBF and 0.35% for GTO.
Find the right allocation for TRBF and GTO
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