FLTW vs. IBIC
FLTW (Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF) and IBIC (iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLTW is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the FTSE Taiwan RIC Capped Index, while IBIC is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2026 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FLTW returned 117.33% vs 4.49% for IBIC. At a correlation of -0.03, they often move in opposite directions. FLTW charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for IBIC.
Performance
FLTW vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FLTW achieves a 71.40% return, which is significantly higher than IBIC's 2.34% return.
FLTW
- 1D
- -1.02%
- 1M
- 16.51%
- YTD
- 71.40%
- 6M
- 77.35%
- 1Y
- 117.33%
- 3Y*
- 42.83%
- 5Y*
- 21.59%
- 10Y*
- —
IBIC
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- 0.28%
- YTD
- 2.34%
- 6M
- 2.50%
- 1Y
- 4.49%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FLTW vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FLTW Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF | 71.40% | 32.00% | 16.68% | 12.81% |
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF | 2.34% | 4.96% | 5.25% | 2.17% |
Correlation
The correlation between FLTW and IBIC is -0.25, 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 | -0.25 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2023 | -0.03 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between FLTW and IBIC has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.03 to -0.25, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.
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
FLTW vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank
FLTW
IBIC
FLTW vs. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF (FLTW) 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.
| FLTW | IBIC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.45 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.96 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.70 | 2.22 | -0.52 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 10.85 | 17.09 | -6.23 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 34.18 | 66.52 | -32.34 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FLTW | IBIC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.54 | 4.99 | -0.45 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.97 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.95 | 3.48 | -2.53 |
Drawdowns
FLTW vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLTW drawdown since its inception was -38.00%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLTW and IBIC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FLTW | IBIC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -38.00% | -0.90% | -37.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.87% | -0.26% | -10.61% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.45% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -38.00% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.18% | -0.16% | -1.02% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.43% | -0.10% | -8.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.45% | 0.07% | +3.38% |
Volatility
FLTW vs. IBIC - Volatility Comparison
Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF (FLTW) has a higher volatility of 11.76% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC) at 0.32%. This indicates that FLTW'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
| FLTW | IBIC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.76% | 0.32% | +11.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 21.34% | 0.67% | +20.67% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.03% | 0.90% | +25.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.44% | 1.58% | +20.86% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.77% | 1.58% | +20.19% |
FLTW vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison
FLTW has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIC's 0.10% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
FLTW vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison
FLTW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.46%, less than IBIC's 3.59% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLTW Franklin FTSE Taiwan ETF | 1.46% | 2.51% | 1.89% | 2.85% | 3.16% | 2.31% | 2.14% | 3.00% | 1.06% |
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF | 3.59% | 4.43% | 4.65% | 0.83% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FLTW and IBIC have a correlation of -0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FLTW has higher volatility (11.76%) compared to IBIC (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLTW dropped -38.00% vs IBIC's -0.90%.
On 1-year performance, FLTW leads with 117.33% vs 4.49% for IBIC. On fees, IBIC is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBIC has been the lower-risk option at 0.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, FLTW has performed better with a 117.33% return vs 4.49%. 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 0.19% for FLTW.
IBIC has the higher dividend yield at 3.59%, compared with 1.46% for FLTW.
FLTW is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. FLTW tracks FTSE Taiwan RIC Capped Index, while IBIC tracks ICE 2026 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for FLTW and 0.10% for IBIC.
IBIC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.99 vs 4.54), 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.
Find the right allocation for FLTW 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