GIND vs. IBIC
GIND (Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF) and IBIC (iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GIND is a Asia Pacific Equities fund actively managed by Goldman Sachs, while IBIC is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2026 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. GIND is actively managed, while IBIC is passively managed. Over the past year, GIND returned -10.21% vs 4.42% for IBIC. At a correlation of -0.22, they often move in opposite directions. GIND charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for IBIC.
Performance
GIND vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GIND achieves a -8.60% return, which is significantly lower than IBIC's 2.43% return.
GIND
- 1D
- -1.76%
- 1M
- 2.14%
- YTD
- -8.60%
- 6M
- -9.40%
- 1Y
- -10.21%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IBIC
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 0.12%
- YTD
- 2.43%
- 6M
- 2.57%
- 1Y
- 4.42%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GIND vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
GIND Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF | -8.60% | 4.70% |
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF | 2.43% | 2.50% |
Correlation
The correlation between GIND and IBIC is -0.27, 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 | -0.27 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 3, 2025 | -0.22 |
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
GIND vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank
GIND
IBIC
GIND vs. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF (GIND) 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.
| GIND | IBIC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -5.60 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -9.79 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.91 | 2.22 | -1.32 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.45 | 16.56 | -17.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.01 | 58.67 | -59.69 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GIND vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GIND drawdown since its inception was -22.97%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GIND and IBIC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GIND | IBIC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.97% | -0.90% | -22.07% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.97% | -0.27% | -22.70% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.34% | -0.08% | -13.26% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.17% | -0.10% | -7.07% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.10% | 0.08% | +10.02% |
Volatility
GIND vs. IBIC - Volatility Comparison
Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF (GIND) has a higher volatility of 5.09% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC) at 0.17%. This indicates that GIND'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
| GIND | IBIC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.09% | 0.17% | +4.92% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.50% | 0.67% | +13.83% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.68% | 0.89% | +15.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.22% | 1.56% | +15.66% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.22% | 1.56% | +15.66% |
GIND vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison
GIND has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIC's 0.10% expense ratio.
Dividends
GIND vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison
GIND has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IBIC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.58%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
GIND Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF | 3.58% | 4.43% | 4.65% | 0.83% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GIND and IBIC have a correlation of -0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GIND has higher volatility (5.09%) compared to IBIC (0.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GIND dropped -22.97% vs IBIC's -0.90%.
On 1-year performance, IBIC leads with 4.42% vs -10.21% for GIND. On fees, IBIC is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBIC has been the lower-risk option at 0.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, IBIC has performed better with a 4.42% return vs -10.21%. 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 0.75% for GIND.
IBIC has the higher dividend yield at 3.58%, compared with 0.00% for GIND.
GIND is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GIND and 0.10% for IBIC.
IBIC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.99 vs -0.62), 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 GIND 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