Data as of Oct 28, 2026.
CGBL vs TLT: Differences, Returns & Fees
Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, CGBL returned +7.1% to TLT's −7.9%; 0% of their weight is in the same names.
askIQ about this page
askIQ about CGBL and TLT
Net assets on Oct 27, 2026: $7.9bn for Capital Group Core Balanced ETF and $47.4bn for iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF.
Pair scorecard
TLT costs 0.18 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 15.0 points; TLT is 6.0 times larger.
| Measure | CGBL | TLT |
|---|---|---|
| Return | ||
| Total return, 1 year | +7.1% | −7.9% |
| Drawdown | ||
| Below its high | 3.4%, high on Aug 13, 2026 | 42.6%, high on Aug 4, 2020 |
| Benchmark | ||
| What it tracks | No index, actively managed | ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index |
| Cost and size | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.33% | 0.15% |
| Net assets, as of Oct 27, 2026 | $7.9bn | $47.4bn |
| Holdings | ||
| Holdings in common | 0% | |
| In the S&P 500, by weight | 48% | |
| Top ten holdings, share of the fund | 59.3% | |
Holdings in common uses holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and Oct 27, 2026. Method
What they share
By the books each fund has filed, CGBL and TLT hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and Oct 27, 2026.
half
0% in common
Only in one fund ↓
Side by side
CGBL and TLT on the fields both publish, as of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +7.1% with distributions reinvested, against +7.5% for its benchmark, the 60%/40% S&P 500 Index/Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Index.
CGBL is actively managed and tracks no index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.33% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 48% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 77 positions, with the top ten at 59.3%. It sat 3.4% below its high of Aug 13, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.
TLT
TLT tracks an index of 20+ year Treasuries. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned −7.9% with distributions reinvested, against −7.8% for its benchmark, the ICE U.S. Treasury 20+ Year Bond Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. It sat 42.6% below its high of Aug 4, 2020 on Oct 28, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, CGBL or TLT?
- In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGBL returned +7.1% and TLT −7.9%.
- Which is cheaper, CGBL or TLT?
- TLT is cheaper, by 0.18 percentage points a year. That is about $18 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.
How this is computed
Overlap adds up the smaller of the two weights for each security both funds hold.
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown
ETFIQ, CGBL against TLT, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cgbl-vs-tlt
ETFIQ. (Oct 28, 2026). CGBL against TLT. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cgbl-vs-tlt
[CGBL against TLT (ETFIQ, Oct 28, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cgbl-vs-tlt)
Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.