FPA vs. IBIC
FPA (First Trust Asia Pacific ex-Japan AlphaDEX Fund) and IBIC (iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FPA is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ AlphaDEX Asia Pacific Ex-Japan 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, FPA returned 72.66% vs 4.38% for IBIC. At a 0.06 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FPA charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for IBIC.
Performance
FPA vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FPA achieves a 52.71% return, which is significantly higher than IBIC's 2.39% return.
FPA
- 1D
- -1.89%
- 1M
- 6.12%
- YTD
- 52.71%
- 6M
- 53.85%
- 1Y
- 72.66%
- 3Y*
- 33.38%
- 5Y*
- 13.80%
- 10Y*
- 11.58%
IBIC
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- 0.08%
- YTD
- 2.39%
- 6M
- 2.49%
- 1Y
- 4.38%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FPA vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FPA First Trust Asia Pacific ex-Japan AlphaDEX Fund | 52.71% | 43.16% | 3.95% | 5.02% |
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF | 2.39% | 4.96% | 5.25% | 2.17% |
Correlation
The correlation between FPA 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 | 0.06 |
The correlation between FPA and IBIC shifts across timeframes, from -0.09 (1 year) to 0.06 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
FPA vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank
FPA
IBIC
FPA vs. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Asia Pacific ex-Japan AlphaDEX Fund (FPA) 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.
| FPA | IBIC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.36 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -5.66 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.45 | 2.21 | -0.76 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.75 | 16.41 | -11.66 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.32 | 58.11 | -41.79 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FPA vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FPA drawdown since its inception was -52.91%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FPA and IBIC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FPA | IBIC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -52.91% | -0.90% | -52.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.37% | -0.27% | -15.10% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.66% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -34.38% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -52.91% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.33% | -0.11% | -3.22% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.46% | -0.10% | -13.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.47% | 0.08% | +4.39% |
Volatility
FPA vs. IBIC - Volatility Comparison
First Trust Asia Pacific ex-Japan AlphaDEX Fund (FPA) has a higher volatility of 15.18% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC) at 0.16%. This indicates that FPA'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
| FPA | IBIC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 15.18% | 0.16% | +15.02% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 25.18% | 0.67% | +24.51% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.29% | 0.89% | +27.40% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.64% | 1.57% | +23.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.73% | 1.57% | +21.16% |
FPA vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison
FPA has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIC's 0.10% expense ratio.
Dividends
FPA vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison
FPA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.49%, less than IBIC's 3.59% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FPA First Trust Asia Pacific ex-Japan AlphaDEX Fund | 3.49% | 4.71% | 3.40% | 3.02% | 4.22% | 5.12% | 1.59% | 3.90% | 2.81% | 3.15% | 2.42% | 1.74% |
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% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FPA 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.
FPA has higher volatility (15.18%) compared to IBIC (0.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FPA dropped -52.91% vs IBIC's -0.90%.
On 1-year performance, FPA leads with 72.66% vs 4.38% for IBIC. On fees, IBIC is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBIC has been the lower-risk option at 0.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, FPA has performed better with a 72.66% return vs 4.38%. 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 0.80% for FPA.
IBIC has the higher dividend yield at 3.59%, compared with 3.49% for FPA.
FPA is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. FPA tracks NASDAQ AlphaDEX Asia Pacific Ex-Japan Index, while IBIC tracks ICE 2026 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for FPA and 0.10% for IBIC.
IBIC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.94 vs 2.59), 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 FPA 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