CLOZ vs. IBIC

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CLOZ (Panagram BBB-B CLO ETF) and IBIC (iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CLOZ is a CLO fund actively managed by Panagram, while IBIC is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2026 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. CLOZ is actively managed, while IBIC is passively managed. Over the past year, CLOZ returned 6.62% vs 4.49% for IBIC. At a correlation of -0.10, they often move in opposite directions. CLOZ charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for IBIC.

Performance

CLOZ vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Panagram BBB-B CLO ETF (CLOZ) and iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CLOZ achieves a 2.62% return, which is significantly higher than IBIC's 2.34% return.

CLOZ

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 0.67%
• YTD: 2.62%
• 6M: 3.25%
• 1Y: 6.62%
• 3Y*: 10.65%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IBIC

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: 0.28%
• YTD: 2.34%
• 6M: 2.50%
• 1Y: 4.49%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CLOZ vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CLOZ Panagram BBB-B CLO ETF	2.62%	5.99%	11.85%	4.08%
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF	2.34%	4.96%	5.25%	2.17%

Correlation

The correlation between CLOZ and IBIC is -0.12, 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	-0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2023	-0.10

Return for Risk

CLOZ vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank

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

CLOZ

CLOZ Risk / Return Rank: 53
CLOZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
CLOZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
CLOZ Omega Ratio Rank: 83
CLOZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
CLOZ Martin Ratio Rank: 37

IBIC

IBIC Risk / Return Rank: 98
IBIC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
IBIC Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
IBIC Omega Ratio Rank: 98
IBIC Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
IBIC Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

CLOZ vs. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Panagram BBB-B CLO ETF (CLOZ) 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.

	CLOZ	IBIC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.93	4.99	-3.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.47	9.01	-6.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	2.22	-0.72
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.70	17.09	-15.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.66	66.52	-60.86
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CLOZ vs. IBIC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CLOZ Sharpe Ratio is 1.93, which is lower than the IBIC Sharpe Ratio of 4.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CLOZ 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CLOZ	IBIC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.93	4.99	-3.05
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.77	3.48	-0.71

Drawdowns

CLOZ vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLOZ drawdown since its inception was -5.32%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLOZ and IBIC.

Drawdown Indicators

	CLOZ	IBIC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.32%	-0.90%	-4.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.90%	-0.26%	-3.64%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-5.32%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.03%	-0.16%	+0.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.38%	-0.10%	-0.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.17%	0.07%	+1.10%

Volatility

CLOZ vs. IBIC - Volatility Comparison

Panagram BBB-B CLO ETF (CLOZ) has a higher volatility of 0.42% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC) at 0.32%. This indicates that CLOZ'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.

Volatility by Period

	CLOZ	IBIC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.42%	0.32%	+0.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.13%	0.67%	+2.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.45%	0.90%	+2.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.80%	1.58%	+2.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.80%	1.58%	+2.22%

CLOZ vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison

CLOZ has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIC's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

CLOZ vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison

CLOZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.38%, more than IBIC's 3.59% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CLOZ Panagram BBB-B CLO ETF	7.38%	7.63%	9.09%	8.81%
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF	3.59%	4.43%	4.65%	0.83%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CLOZ and IBIC in my portfolio?

CLOZ and IBIC have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CLOZ or IBIC?

CLOZ has higher volatility (0.42%) compared to IBIC (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CLOZ dropped -5.32% vs IBIC's -0.90%.

Which ETF is better, CLOZ or IBIC?

On 1-year performance, CLOZ leads with 6.62% vs 4.49% for IBIC. On fees, IBIC is cheaper at 0.10% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CLOZ or IBIC?

Over the 1-year period, CLOZ has performed better with a 6.62% return vs 4.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CLOZ or IBIC?

IBIC is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for CLOZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CLOZ or IBIC?

CLOZ has the higher dividend yield at 7.38%, compared with 3.59% for IBIC.

What is the main difference between CLOZ and IBIC?

CLOZ is categorized as CLO, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Panagram and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for CLOZ and 0.10% for IBIC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBIC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.99 vs 1.93), 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.