AAVM vs. IBID

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

AAVM (Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF) and IBID (iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AAVM is a Multi-factor fund actively managed by Alpha Architect, while IBID is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2027 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. AAVM is actively managed, while IBID is passively managed. Over the past year, AAVM returned 29.85% vs 3.92% for IBID. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. AAVM charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for IBID.

Performance

AAVM vs. IBID - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF (AAVM) and iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF (IBID). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AAVM achieves a 13.98% return, which is significantly higher than IBID's 1.94% return.

AAVM

• 1D: -1.90%
• 1M: -1.17%
• YTD: 13.98%
• 6M: 12.98%
• 1Y: 29.85%
• 3Y*: 18.21%
• 5Y*: 6.54%
• 10Y*: —

IBID

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: -0.25%
• YTD: 1.94%
• 6M: 2.03%
• 1Y: 3.92%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AAVM vs. IBID - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
AAVM Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF	13.98%	18.54%	12.07%	4.62%
IBID iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF	1.94%	5.66%	4.71%	2.61%

Correlation

The correlation between AAVM and IBID is -0.13, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.13
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2023	0.04

The correlation between AAVM and IBID shifts across timeframes, from -0.13 (1 year) to 0.04 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

AAVM vs. IBID — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AAVM

AAVM Risk / Return Rank: 61
AAVM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
AAVM Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
AAVM Omega Ratio Rank: 60
AAVM Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
AAVM Martin Ratio Rank: 66

IBID

IBID Risk / Return Rank: 95
IBID Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
IBID Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
IBID Omega Ratio Rank: 95
IBID Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
IBID Martin Ratio Rank: 95

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AAVM vs. IBID - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF (AAVM) and iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF (IBID). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	AAVM	IBID	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.87	3.19	-1.32
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.64	5.38	-2.75
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.72	-0.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.76	7.20	-4.44
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.28	29.14	-17.86

AAVM vs. IBID - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AAVM Sharpe Ratio is 1.87, which is lower than the IBID Sharpe Ratio of 3.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AAVM and IBID, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

AAVM vs. IBID - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AAVM drawdown since its inception was -34.71%, which is greater than IBID's maximum drawdown of -1.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AAVM and IBID.

Drawdown Indicators

	AAVM	IBID	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.71%	-1.28%	-33.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.85%	-0.55%	-10.30%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.23%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.73%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.36%	-0.55%	-2.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.25%	-0.22%	-13.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.65%	0.13%	+2.52%

Volatility

AAVM vs. IBID - Volatility Comparison

Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF (AAVM) has a higher volatility of 5.92% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF (IBID) at 0.35%. This indicates that AAVM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBID based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AAVM	IBID	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.92%	0.35%	+5.57%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.79%	0.86%	+12.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.05%	1.23%	+14.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.80%	2.24%	+13.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.96%	2.24%	+12.72%

AAVM vs. IBID - Expense Ratio Comparison

AAVM has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than IBID's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

AAVM vs. IBID - Dividend Comparison

AAVM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.80%, less than IBID's 3.68% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AAVM Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF	1.80%	2.05%	2.54%	4.13%	2.24%	0.82%	0.00%	1.76%	0.93%	0.81%
IBID iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF	3.68%	4.43%	4.24%	0.81%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AAVM and IBID in my portfolio?

AAVM and IBID have a correlation of -0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AAVM or IBID?

AAVM has higher volatility (5.92%) compared to IBID (0.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AAVM dropped -34.71% vs IBID's -1.28%.

Which ETF is better, AAVM or IBID?

On 1-year performance, AAVM leads with 29.85% vs 3.92% for IBID. On fees, IBID is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBID has been the lower-risk option at 0.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AAVM or IBID?

Over the 1-year period, AAVM has performed better with a 29.85% return vs 3.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AAVM or IBID?

IBID is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for AAVM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AAVM or IBID?

IBID has the higher dividend yield at 3.68%, compared with 1.80% for AAVM.

What is the main difference between AAVM and IBID?

AAVM is categorized as Multi-factor, while IBID is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Alpha Architect and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for AAVM and 0.10% for IBID.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBID currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.19 vs 1.87), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.