What Moves Like IBDR

iShares iBonds Dec 2026 Term Corporate ETF Fund · NYSE Arca

The tradable tickers whose daily moves track IBDR most closely over the past year, filtered to risk comparable with IBDR's own.

Closest match

XHLF BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF — 0.552 correlation over the past year, and 32% calmer than IBDR.

About IBDR

Annualised volatility 0.6%
Beta vs SPY 0.00
Market correlation 0.066
Traded per day $14.3M
Rate sensitivity -0.04
Volatility sensitivity -0.04
251 sessions to 2026-11-09 · IBDR volatility 0.6% annualised · $14.3M a day
Ticker 1-year correlation 3-year Volatility vs IBDR Risk What it is
XHLF BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF
0.552
0.420 0.68× 32% calmer Fund
MINT PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active Exchange-Traded Fund
0.470
0.325 0.74× 26% calmer Fund
TFLO iShares Treasury Floating Rate Bond ETF
0.464
0.250 0.71× 30% calmer Fund
JPST JPMorgan Ultra-Short Income ETF
0.423
0.560 1.00× similar Fund
RAVI Northern Trust Ultra-Short Fixed Income ETF
0.411
0.490 0.96× similar Fund
XONE BondBloxx Bloomberg One Year Target Duration US Treasury ETF
0.397
0.624 1.06× similar Fund
IBDS iShares iBonds Dec 2027 Term Corporate ETF
0.377
0.863 1.41× 41% choppier Fund
ULST State Street Ultra Short Term Bond ETF
0.356
0.457 1.11× 11% choppier Fund
YEAR AB Ultra Short Income ETF
0.337
0.489 1.33× 33% choppier Fund

Showing 9 of 9 tickers that qualified. Correlation is of daily returns; 1.000 would mean moving in lockstep, 0.000 no relationship at all.

What this is for

Three questions, one number behind all of them.

How to read the two correlation columns

The one-year figure is what the relationship looks like now. The three-year figure is what it has looked like over a longer stretch. Comparing them is the point: when they agree, the relationship is structural and likely to hold. When the one-year number is far below the three-year one, something has changed — a shift in business mix, an index reconstitution, a sector that has stopped moving together — and the recent figure is the one to trust less, not more.

Correlation measures whether two things move together, not whether they move by the same amount. That is why the volatility column is there. Two tickers can correlate at 0.99 while one swings half again as hard, and swapping one for the other would quietly change how much risk you are carrying.

What was deliberately left out

Ranking purely by correlation produces answers that are mathematically perfect and practically useless. The closest matches to AAPL by raw correlation are leveraged AAPL funds at 0.999 — correct, and not replacements for anything. Four filters run before a ticker is allowed to appear:

Where all of that leaves a ticker with no close match, the page says so. A stock with no substitute is a real and useful finding, and inventing a loose one to fill the table would be worse than an empty answer.

Limits, stated up front

Where the numbers come from

Correlations are computed in-house from a daily price history and rebuilt every night. What gets published is the derived statistic — a correlation coefficient, a volatility ratio, an observation count — and nothing from which a price or return series could be reconstructed. The rest of the Markets section is on the Markets overview, including futures positioning extremes and SEC Form 4 insider transactions.