EATZ vs. IBIC

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EATZ (AdvisorShares Restaurant ETF) and IBIC (iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EATZ is a Consumer Discretionary Equities fund actively managed by AdvisorShares, while IBIC is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2026 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. EATZ is actively managed, while IBIC is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. EATZ charges 1.00%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for IBIC.

Performance

EATZ vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

EATZ

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IBIC

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 0.12%
• YTD: 2.43%
• 6M: 2.57%
• 1Y: 4.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EATZ vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
EATZ AdvisorShares Restaurant ETF	4.80%	-6.67%	23.21%	14.22%
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF	2.43%	4.96%	5.25%	2.17%

Correlation

The correlation between EATZ and IBIC is -0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.09
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2023	-0.01

Return for Risk

EATZ vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank

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

EATZ

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

IBIC

IBIC Risk / Return Rank: 98
IBIC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
IBIC Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
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.

EATZ vs. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AdvisorShares Restaurant ETF (EATZ) 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.

	EATZ	IBIC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	4.99	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	8.97	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	2.22	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	16.56	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	58.67	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	EATZ	IBIC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	—	-0.90%	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-0.27%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	—	-0.08%	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	—	-0.10%	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.08%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	EATZ	IBIC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	0.17%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	0.67%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	0.89%	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	—	1.56%	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	—	1.56%	—

EATZ vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison

EATZ has a 1.00% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIC's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

EATZ vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison

EATZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.48%, less than IBIC's 3.58% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
EATZ AdvisorShares Restaurant ETF	0.48%	0.50%	0.18%	0.49%	2.35%	0.15%
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF	3.58%	4.43%	4.65%	0.83%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EATZ and IBIC in my portfolio?

EATZ and IBIC have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, EATZ or IBIC?

On fees, IBIC is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, EATZ or IBIC?

IBIC is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for EATZ.

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

IBIC has the higher dividend yield at 3.58%, compared with 0.48% for EATZ.

What is the main difference between EATZ and IBIC?

EATZ is categorized as Consumer Discretionary Equities, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: AdvisorShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.00% for EATZ and 0.10% for IBIC.