PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AMZW vs. IBIC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AMZW vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill AMZN WeeklyPay ETF (AMZW) and iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AMZW achieves a 4.20% return, which is significantly higher than IBIC's 2.33% return.


AMZW

1D
3.06%
1M
-11.47%
YTD
4.20%
6M
6.06%
1Y
13.96%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

IBIC

1D
0.10%
1M
-0.02%
YTD
2.33%
6M
2.45%
1Y
4.32%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AMZW vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between AMZW and IBIC is -0.16, 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

-0.16

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025

-0.16

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

AMZW vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank

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

AMZW
AMZW Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
AMZW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AMZW Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
AMZW Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
AMZW Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
AMZW Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank

IBIC
IBIC Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
IBIC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBIC Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBIC Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
IBIC Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBIC Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

AMZW vs. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill AMZN WeeklyPay ETF (AMZW) and iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC). 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.


AMZWIBICDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-4.67

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-8.30

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.09

2.23

-1.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.44

16.64

-16.20

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.01

59.19

-58.18

AMZW vs. IBIC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AMZW Sharpe Ratio is 0.32, which is lower than the IBIC Sharpe Ratio of 4.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AMZW and IBIC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

AMZW vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AMZW drawdown since its inception was -26.79%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMZW and IBIC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AMZWIBICDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-26.79%

-0.90%

-25.89%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-26.79%

-0.27%

-26.52%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-14.19%

-0.17%

-14.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.08%

-0.10%

-8.98%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

11.70%

0.08%

+11.62%

Volatility

AMZW vs. IBIC - Volatility Comparison

Roundhill AMZN WeeklyPay ETF (AMZW) has a higher volatility of 11.54% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC) at 0.22%. This indicates that AMZW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBIC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AMZWIBICDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.54%

0.22%

+11.32%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

25.75%

0.67%

+25.08%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

37.07%

0.89%

+36.18%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

37.07%

1.57%

+35.50%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

37.07%

1.57%

+35.50%

AMZW vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison

AMZW has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIC's 0.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

AMZW vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison

AMZW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 46.05%, more than IBIC's 3.59% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
AMZW
Roundhill AMZN WeeklyPay ETF
46.05%25.29%0.00%0.00%
IBIC
iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF
3.59%4.43%4.65%0.83%

Frequently Asked Questions


AMZW and IBIC have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

AMZW has higher volatility (11.54%) compared to IBIC (0.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AMZW dropped -26.79% vs IBIC's -0.90%.

On 1-year performance, AMZW leads with 13.96% vs 4.32% for IBIC. On fees, IBIC is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBIC has been the lower-risk option at 0.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, AMZW has performed better with a 13.96% return vs 4.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IBIC is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for AMZW.

AMZW has the higher dividend yield at 46.05%, compared with 3.59% for IBIC.

AMZW is categorized as Derivative Income, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for AMZW and 0.10% for IBIC.

IBIC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.99 vs 0.32), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AMZW and IBIC

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer