ZTEN vs. IBGK
ZTEN (F/M 10-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) and IBGK (iShares iBonds Dec 2054 Term Treasury ETF) are both Long-Term Bond funds - ZTEN tracks the ICE 10-Year US Target Maturity Corporate Index - Benchmark TR Gross while IBGK tracks the ICE 2054 Maturity US Treasury Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, ZTEN returned 2.26% vs -2.38% for IBGK. Their correlation of 0.87 means they have usually moved in the same direction. ZTEN charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for IBGK.
Performance
ZTEN vs. IBGK - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ZTEN achieves a -0.89% return, which is significantly higher than IBGK's -3.58% return.
ZTEN
- 1D
- -0.27%
- 1M
- -1.69%
- 6M
- -1.01%
- YTD
- -0.89%
- 1Y
- 2.26%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 5.19%
IBGK
- 1D
- -0.75%
- 1M
- -3.84%
- 6M
- -3.50%
- YTD
- -3.58%
- 1Y
- -2.38%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -1.65%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $10.21K | $15.17K | $32.94K | |
| $44.87K | $43.88K | $108.71K |
ZTEN vs. IBGK - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
ZTEN F/M 10-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | -0.89% | 9.15% | 0.29% |
IBGK iShares iBonds Dec 2054 Term Treasury ETF | -3.58% | 3.66% | -1.93% |
Correlation
The correlation between ZTEN and IBGK is 0.86, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.86 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2024 | 0.87 |
The correlation between ZTEN and IBGK has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
ZTEN vs. IBGK — Risk / Return Rank
ZTEN
IBGK
ZTEN vs. IBGK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for F/M 10-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (ZTEN) and iShares iBonds Dec 2054 Term Treasury ETF (IBGK). 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.
| ZTEN | IBGK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.78 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.08 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.11 | 0.99 | +0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.98 | -0.15 | +1.13 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.72 | -0.33 | +3.04 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ZTEN vs. IBGK - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ZTEN drawdown since its inception was -3.43%, smaller than the maximum IBGK drawdown of -14.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZTEN and IBGK.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ZTEN | IBGK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -3.43% | -14.62% | +11.19% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.32% | -7.48% | +4.16% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.50% | -12.13% | +9.63% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.86% | -8.15% | +7.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.19% | 3.41% | -2.22% |
Volatility
ZTEN vs. IBGK - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for F/M 10-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (ZTEN) is 1.35%, while iShares iBonds Dec 2054 Term Treasury ETF (IBGK) has a volatility of 2.38%. This indicates that ZTEN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IBGK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ZTEN | IBGK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.35% | 2.38% | -1.03% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.01% | 6.58% | -2.57% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.96% | 8.93% | -3.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.72% | 11.63% | -5.91% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.72% | 11.63% | -5.91% |
ZTEN vs. IBGK - Expense Ratio Comparison
ZTEN has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than IBGK's 0.07% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
ZTEN vs. IBGK - Dividend Comparison
ZTEN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.58%, more than IBGK's 4.83% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
IBGK iShares iBonds Dec 2054 Term Treasury ETF | 4.41% | 4.59% | 3.15% |
ZTEN F/M 10-Year Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 5.13% | 5.16% | 0.44% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ZTEN and IBGK have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IBGK has higher volatility (2.38%) compared to ZTEN (1.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZTEN dropped -3.43% vs IBGK's -14.62%.
On 1-year performance, ZTEN leads with 2.26% vs -2.38% for IBGK. On fees, IBGK is cheaper at 0.07% per year. On volatility, ZTEN has been the lower-risk option at 1.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, ZTEN has performed better with a 2.26% return vs -2.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IBGK is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for ZTEN.
ZTEN has the higher dividend yield at 5.13%, compared with 4.41% for IBGK.
ZTEN tracks ICE 10-Year US Target Maturity Corporate Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while IBGK tracks ICE 2054 Maturity US Treasury Index. They also come from different issuers: F/m and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for ZTEN and 0.07% for IBGK.
ZTEN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.65 vs -0.12), 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 ZTEN and IBGK
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