IRTR ranks 3rd and TBFG 10th of 37 funds in the Multi-Asset Allocation Category.
IRTR vs TBFG
IRTR −0.38pt a year
0.08%0.46%
IRTR 7.3×the volume
12.7K1.74K
IRTR vs TBFG Performance
+5.1%+9.1%
- IRTR 0.08%, better
- TBFG 0.46%
- IRTR $60M
- TBFG $378M
- IRTR +5.1%
- TBFG +9.1%, better
- IRTR 3.17%, better
- TBFG 2.49%
- IRTR 29140
- TBFG 24
- IRTR 12.7K sh, better
- TBFG 1.74K sh
- IRTR $31.52
- TBFG $32.04
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | IRTR | TBFG |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | A97Higher | B61 |
| Mission | A100Higher | A81 |
| Risk | A82Higher | C46 |
| Tradability | B62Higher | C41 |
| Holdings | A80Higher | B68 |
| Durability | B56 | B67Higher |
Rank among Multi-Asset Allocation funds
Same Category. IRTR and TBFG are both graded against the same 37 Multi-Asset Allocation funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
IRTRA
TBFGB
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.
TBFG Three in-house models, run independently, decide what this global fund of funds holds. Launched in 2024, it is an allocation ETF where the mix shifts on the adviser's risk signals instead of sitting at a fixed 80/20 split.
Stated mandate
IRTR The fund seeks conservative exposure through a broad portfolio of stock and bond ETFs spanning global asset classes.
TBFG The Fund seeks long-term growth of capital. It systematically allocates among three adviser-developed strategies that rebalance underlying funds using proprietary risk-management techniques.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
IRTR vs TBFG 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 TBFG Cost
Overpaying TBFG vs IRTR
$7,541
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
IRTR 0.08%
$1,689
TBFG 0.46%
$9,230
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | IRTR | TBFG | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $147 | $830 | $683 |
| 20 | $575 | $3,195 | $2,620 |
| 30 | $1,689 | $9,230 | $7,541 |
- 0.08%IRTR, cheaper
- 0.46%TBFG
- Middle half of Multi-Asset Allocation funds
- Median 0.57%
IRTR 2nd cheapest of 37 funds
TBFG 15th cheapest of 37 funds
IRTR vs TBFG Dividends
- IRTR 3.17%, better
- TBFG 2.49%
- IRTR $1.00
- TBFG $0.79
- IRTR $0.08
- TBFG $0.14
- IRTR Oct 2, 2026
- TBFG Sep 24, 2026
- IRTR Oct 7, 2026
- TBFG Sep 25, 2026
- IRTR Monthly
- TBFG Quarterly
Distribution history
IRTR vs TBFG Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- IRTR 7.3%TBFG 9.0%
- Return per unit of risk
- IRTR 1.14TBFG 0.79
- Worst fall
- IRTR −6.3%TBFG −13.4%
- Market sensitivity
- IRTR 0.47TBFG 0.71
Popular comparisons
- 0.08% · 0.06%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.46% · 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.
- 0.46% · 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.
- 0.46% · 0.29%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.