Screener
BINC vs IMTB
iShares Flexible Income Active ETF vs iShares Core 5-10 Year USD Bond ETF
Key differences
- IMTB costs 0.34% less per year.
- BINC is significantly larger than IMTB — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- BINC follows a active selection strategy; IMTB uses index tracking.
- IMTB has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| BINC | IMTB | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.40% | 0.06% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $16.9B | $280M |
| Since | 2023 | 2016 |
| Dividend yield | 5.60% | 4.46% |
| Asset class | fixed income | fixed income |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | active selection | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | +6.3% | +6.6% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | +4.5% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +0.5% |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | 0.17 |
| Volatility 1Y | 2.29% | 4.06% |
| Max drawdown | -2.69% | -18.15% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to BINC and IMTB
Explore further