TRDL.DE vs. CEMC.DE
TRDL.DE (Invesco US Treasury Bond 10+ Year UCITS ETF Dist) and CEMC.DE (iShares $ Treasury Bond 10-20yr UCITS ETF EUR Hedged (Acc)) are both exchange-traded funds - TRDL.DE is a Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Long Treasury Index, while CEMC.DE is a Long-Term Bond fund tracking the ICE US Treasury 10-20 Year Bond Index. Both are passively managed. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TRDL.DE charges 0.06%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for CEMC.DE.
Performance
TRDL.DE vs. CEMC.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TRDL.DE achieves a 0.56% return, which is significantly higher than CEMC.DE's -1.27% return.
TRDL.DE
- 1D
- 0.19%
- 1M
- 1.37%
- YTD
- 0.56%
- 6M
- -0.99%
- 1Y
- 1.59%
- 3Y*
- -4.02%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CEMC.DE
- 1D
- 0.38%
- 1M
- 0.40%
- YTD
- -1.27%
- 6M
- -1.65%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TRDL.DE vs. CEMC.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
TRDL.DE Invesco US Treasury Bond 10+ Year UCITS ETF Dist | 0.56% | 2.52% |
CEMC.DE iShares $ Treasury Bond 10-20yr UCITS ETF EUR Hedged (Acc) | -1.27% | 2.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between TRDL.DE and CEMC.DE is 0.74, 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 Jul 1, 2025 | 0.74 |
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
TRDL.DE vs. CEMC.DE — Risk / Return Rank
TRDL.DE
CEMC.DE
TRDL.DE vs. CEMC.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco US Treasury Bond 10+ Year UCITS ETF Dist (TRDL.DE) and iShares $ Treasury Bond 10-20yr UCITS ETF EUR Hedged (Acc) (CEMC.DE). 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.
| TRDL.DE | CEMC.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.04 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.23 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.51 | — | — |
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
| TRDL.DE | CEMC.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.18 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.28 | 0.12 | -0.41 |
Drawdowns
TRDL.DE vs. CEMC.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TRDL.DE drawdown since its inception was -21.20%, which is greater than CEMC.DE's maximum drawdown of -6.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TRDL.DE and CEMC.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TRDL.DE | CEMC.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.20% | -6.93% | -14.27% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.76% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.89% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -16.50% | -4.19% | -12.31% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.77% | -2.13% | -9.64% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.09% | — | — |
Volatility
TRDL.DE vs. CEMC.DE - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TRDL.DE | CEMC.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.50% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.26% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.00% | 7.94% | +1.06% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.14% | 7.94% | +5.20% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.14% | 7.94% | +5.20% |
TRDL.DE vs. CEMC.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
TRDL.DE has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than CEMC.DE's 0.10% 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
TRDL.DE vs. CEMC.DE - Dividend Comparison
TRDL.DE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.15%, while CEMC.DE has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEMC.DE iShares $ Treasury Bond 10-20yr UCITS ETF EUR Hedged (Acc) | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TRDL.DE Invesco US Treasury Bond 10+ Year UCITS ETF Dist | 4.15% | 4.26% | 4.36% | 2.87% | 0.51% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TRDL.DE and CEMC.DE have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, TRDL.DE is cheaper at 0.06% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
TRDL.DE is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.10% for CEMC.DE.
TRDL.DE is categorized as Government Bonds, while CEMC.DE is Long-Term Bond. TRDL.DE tracks Bloomberg US Long Treasury Index, while CEMC.DE tracks ICE US Treasury 10-20 Year Bond Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.06% for TRDL.DE and 0.10% for CEMC.DE.
Find the right allocation for TRDL.DE and CEMC.DE
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