IRTR ranks 3rd and TBFC 9th of 37 funds in the Multi-Asset Allocation Category.
IRTR vs TBFC
IRTR −0.36pt a year
0.08%0.44%
IRTR 5.8×the volume
12.7K2.19K
IRTR vs TBFC Performance
+5.1%+4.1%
- IRTR 0.08%, better
- TBFC 0.44%
- IRTR $60M
- TBFC $354M
- IRTR +5.1%, better
- TBFC +4.1%
- IRTR 3.17%
- TBFC 3.18%, better
- IRTR 29140
- TBFC 27
- IRTR 12.7K sh, better
- TBFC 2.19K sh
- IRTR $31.52
- TBFC $28.58
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | IRTR | TBFC |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A97Higher | B64 |
| Mission | A100Higher | A74 |
| Risk | A82Higher | C53 |
| Tradability | B62Higher | C49 |
| Holdings | A80Higher | B60 |
| Durability | B56 | B67Higher |
Rank among Multi-Asset Allocation funds
Same Category. IRTR and TBFC are both graded against the same 37 Multi-Asset Allocation funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
IRTRA
TBFCB
In short
IRTR A whole retirement portfolio in one ticker: global stock and bond ETFs blended at the conservative end, for 0.08% a year. That is index-fund pricing on a job most allocation funds charge roughly ten times more to do.
TBFC A conservative allocation fund that doesn't sit still: systematic models reset the blend of global stock and bond exposures on a set schedule, emerging markets included. Active management for 0.44%, below the typical allocation fund's fee.
Stated mandate
IRTR The fund seeks conservative exposure through a broad portfolio of stock and bond ETFs spanning global asset classes.
TBFC The Fund seeks long-term capital appreciation while maintaining an approach consistent with capital preservation.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
IRTR vs TBFC Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
IRTR vs TBFC Cost
Overpaying TBFC vs IRTR
$7,163
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
IRTR 0.08%
$1,689
TBFC 0.44%
$8,852
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | IRTR | TBFC | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $147 | $794 | $647 |
| 20 | $575 | $3,061 | $2,486 |
| 30 | $1,689 | $8,852 | $7,163 |
- 0.08%IRTR, cheaper
- 0.44%TBFC
- Middle half of Multi-Asset Allocation funds
- Median 0.57%
IRTR 2nd cheapest of 37 funds
TBFC 14th cheapest of 37 funds
IRTR vs TBFC Dividends
- IRTR 3.17%
- TBFC 3.18%, better
- IRTR $1.00
- TBFC $0.91
- IRTR $0.08
- TBFC $0.21
- IRTR Oct 2, 2026
- TBFC Sep 24, 2026
- IRTR Oct 7, 2026
- TBFC Sep 25, 2026
- IRTR Monthly
- TBFC Quarterly
Distribution history
IRTR vs TBFC Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- IRTR 7.3%TBFC 6.3%
- Return per unit of risk
- IRTR 1.14TBFC 0.54
- Worst fall
- IRTR −6.3%TBFC −8.9%
- Market sensitivity
- IRTR 0.47TBFC 0.47Same figure. Both funds show the same value, so neither comes out ahead.
Popular comparisons
- 0.08% · 0.06%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.44% · 0.06%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.08% · 0.15%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.44% · 0.15%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.08% · 0.29%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.44% · 0.29%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.