Barbell vs. Bullet Strategies Under Curve Shifts

Two portfolios with identical duration can produce wildly different returns. The barbell strategy (concentrating in short and long maturities) and bullet strategy (concentrating around a single maturity) both achieve the same duration target—but they respond differently to curve reshaping. When the yield curve shifts in parallel, the barbell wins. When the curve steepens, the bullet wins. The point is: duration tells you how much rate risk you own, not which rate risk.

The Core Trade-Off (Why This Matters)

A bullet portfolio holds bonds clustered around the target duration. If you need 5-year duration, you buy 5-year bonds. Simple. The portfolio has low convexity—its price-yield relationship is nearly linear.

A barbell portfolio achieves the same 5-year duration by mixing extremes: perhaps 50% in 2-year bonds and 50% in 10-year bonds. The weighted average duration equals 5 years, but the portfolio has high convexity—its price-yield relationship curves favorably.

Convexity creates the asymmetry. For the same duration, a higher-convexity portfolio gains more when rates fall and loses less when rates rise (Fabozzi & Mann, 2021). Sounds like free money—until the curve doesn't move in parallel (which is most of the time).

Worked Example: Constructing Matched-Duration Portfolios

You target 5-year duration with $1 million to invest. Current yields: 2-year at 3.59%, 5-year at 3.45%, 10-year at 3.67% (U.S. Treasury, December 2025).

Bullet Portfolio

Hold 100% in 5-year Treasury notes.

• Duration: 5.0 years
• Convexity: 25 (low)
• Yield: 3.45%

Barbell Portfolio

Hold 50% in 2-year notes (duration 1.9 years) and 50% in 10-year notes (duration 8.1 years).

• Duration: (0.50 x 1.9) + (0.50 x 8.1) = 5.0 years
• Convexity: 60 (high—long-end bonds contribute disproportionately)
• Yield: (0.50 x 3.59%) + (0.50 x 3.67%) = 3.63%

Notice the barbell yields 18 bps more than the bullet. This isn't a free lunch—it's compensation for curve risk.

Scenario Analysis: Three Curve Shifts

Scenario 1: Parallel Shift Down 100 bps

All rates fall by 100 bps simultaneously (the textbook case).

Bullet return:

• Duration effect: +5.0%
• Convexity adjustment: 0.5 x 25 x (0.01)^2 = +0.0013%
• Total: +5.0%

Barbell return:

• Duration effect: +5.0%
• Convexity adjustment: 0.5 x 60 x (0.01)^2 = +0.0030%
• Actual convexity benefit (non-linear): approximately +0.3% extra
• Total: +5.3%

Winner: Barbell (+0.3% outperformance)

The durable lesson: convexity is always beneficial in parallel shifts. The question is whether you pay too much for it through lower yields or curve exposure.

Scenario 2: Curve Steepening (+50 bps Long End Only)

The 2-year rate stays flat; the 10-year rate rises 50 bps. This happened repeatedly during 2023 as the Fed paused and term premiums expanded.

Bullet return:

• 5-year rate rises approximately 25 bps (middle of the curve)
• Duration effect: -5.0 x 0.25% = -1.25%
• Total: -1.25%

Barbell return:

• 2-year position: 0% (rate unchanged)
• 10-year position: -8.1 x 0.50% = -4.05%
• Weighted: (0.50 x 0%) + (0.50 x -4.05%) = -2.0%
• Total: -2.0%

Winner: Bullet (+0.75% outperformance)

The causal chain: Curve steepens -> Long end falls more -> Barbell underperforms bullet

Scenario 3: Curve Flattening (-50 bps Long End Only)

The 10-year rate falls 50 bps; the 2-year stays flat. This pattern emerged during recessions (2008, 2020) when the Fed cut aggressively but long-term expectations shifted.

Bullet return:

• 5-year rate falls approximately 25 bps
• Duration effect: +5.0 x 0.25% = +1.25%
• Total: +1.25%

Barbell return:

• 2-year position: 0%
• 10-year position: +8.1 x 0.50% = +4.05%
• Weighted: (0.50 x 0%) + (0.50 x +4.05%) = +2.0%
• Total: +2.0%

Winner: Barbell (+0.75% outperformance)

Why this matters: The barbell thrives when you correctly predict that long rates will fall relative to short rates. The bullet protects you when the curve moves against you.

Historical Context: 2022-2024 Inversion

The 2022-2024 period produced the longest yield curve inversion on record—26+ months. The 2y-10y spread reached approximately -100 bps at its most inverted (Federal Reserve, 2024).

What this meant for positioning:

• Barbell holders with heavy 10-year exposure suffered during the aggressive steepening phases
• Bullet holders around 5-year duration experienced less volatility
• Key rate duration differences mattered more than overall duration

During the 2022 hiking cycle, 10-year yields rose 236 bps in a single year while 2-year yields rose even faster (Hartford Funds, 2025). A barbell strategy lost less than a bullet in this specific case because the curve flattened—the short end rose more than the long end.

The test: understanding which curve shift you're betting on determines which strategy wins.

Key Rate Duration: The Hidden Exposure

Overall duration masks curve exposure. Key rate duration decomposes sensitivity to specific maturity points (2-year, 5-year, 10-year, 30-year).

Bullet portfolio key rate durations:

• KRD at 5-year: 5.0
• KRD at 2-year: 0
• KRD at 10-year: 0

Barbell portfolio key rate durations:

• KRD at 5-year: 0
• KRD at 2-year: 0.95 (half the 1.9-year duration)
• KRD at 10-year: 4.05 (half the 8.1-year duration)

The sum of key rate durations equals total effective duration for both. But the barbell has concentrated exposure to the wings of the curve while the bullet has exposure only to the belly.

The CFA Institute notes that key rate durations sum to effective duration—but capturing non-parallel shift risk requires examining each point separately (CFA Institute, 2025).

Detection Signals: You're Likely Mispositioned If...

• You own a barbell but expect curve steepening (contradictory bet)
• Your portfolio's 10-year KRD exceeds 3.0 while believing rates will normalize higher
• You chose the bullet for its "simplicity" without considering your curve view
• Your convexity is below 20 and you expect large parallel moves
• You haven't calculated key rate durations—only overall duration

Checklist: Choosing Your Strategy

Essential (Start Here)

• Define your duration target based on liability or benchmark
• Articulate your curve view: parallel, steepening, or flattening
• Calculate convexity for each construction approach
• Document the yield differential (barbell often pays more, but not always)

High-Impact Refinements

• Decompose key rate durations at 2y, 5y, 10y, 30y
• Stress test under +/- 50 bps steepening and flattening scenarios
• Rebalance when curve views change materially

When to Choose Each Strategy

Choose the bullet when:

• You have no strong curve view
• You want to minimize tracking error versus a duration target
• The yield curve is already flat or inverted (limited steepening upside for barbell)
• You prioritize simplicity over convexity benefits

Choose the barbell when:

• You expect large parallel moves (convexity benefits compound)
• You believe the curve will flatten (long end outperforms)
• You're willing to accept higher volatility for higher expected return
• The yield pickup compensates for curve risk

The Convexity Trade-Off in Practice

Higher convexity isn't free. The CFA Institute documents that for two portfolios with same duration, higher convexity delivers higher sensitivity to large yield declines and lower sensitivity to large yield increases (CFA Institute, 2025). That asymmetry costs something—usually in yield or curve exposure.

During the 2013 Taper Tantrum, 10-year yields rose 150 bps in 5 months (Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, 2021). A barbell with duration concentrated in 10-year bonds suffered greater losses than a bullet with the same overall duration but no long-end concentration.

The point is: convexity protects in parallel shifts. Curve positioning determines everything else.

Your Next Step

Take your current bond allocation and calculate its key rate durations—not just overall duration. Compare what curve shift would hurt you most. If you're running a barbell without a flattening view, you're making an implicit bet you may not intend.

---

Related: Key Rate Duration to Measure Curve Risk | Convexity Concept and Calculation | Interpreting Steepeners and Flatteners

---

Sources: CFA Institute (2025). Yield-Based Bond Convexity and Portfolio Properties. | CFA Institute (2025). Curve-Based and Empirical Fixed-Income Risk Measures. | Hartford Funds (2025). Duration of the Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index. | Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (2021). No Taper Tantrum This Time? | U.S. Treasury (2025). Daily Treasury Par Yield Curve Rates.