GMMA vs. IBIC

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

GMMA (GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF) and IBIC (iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GMMA is a Tactical Allocation fund tracking the MarketVector GammaRoad U.S. Equity Strategy 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, GMMA returned 9.99% vs 4.38% for IBIC. At a correlation of -0.16, they often move in opposite directions. GMMA charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for IBIC.

Performance

GMMA vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF (GMMA) 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, GMMA achieves a 2.92% return, which is significantly higher than IBIC's 2.39% return.

GMMA

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 0.12%
• YTD: 2.92%
• 6M: 2.80%
• 1Y: 9.99%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IBIC

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: 0.08%
• YTD: 2.39%
• 6M: 2.49%
• 1Y: 4.38%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GMMA vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GMMA GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF	2.92%	8.95%	0.22%
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF	2.39%	4.96%	0.90%

Correlation

The correlation between GMMA and IBIC is -0.19, 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	-0.19
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 17, 2024	-0.16

Return for Risk

GMMA vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank

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

GMMA

GMMA Risk / Return Rank: 54
GMMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
GMMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
GMMA Omega Ratio Rank: 54
GMMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
GMMA Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

GMMA vs. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF (GMMA) 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.

	GMMA	IBIC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.68	4.94	-3.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.34	8.90	-6.55
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	2.21	-0.88
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.96	16.41	-13.45
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.73	58.11	-48.37

GMMA vs. IBIC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GMMA Sharpe Ratio is 1.68, which is lower than the IBIC Sharpe Ratio of 4.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GMMA 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.

Drawdowns

GMMA vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GMMA drawdown since its inception was -5.21%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GMMA and IBIC.

Drawdown Indicators

	GMMA	IBIC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.21%	-0.90%	-4.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.39%	-0.27%	-3.12%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.07%	-0.11%	-0.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.24%	-0.10%	-1.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.03%	0.08%	+0.95%

Volatility

GMMA vs. IBIC - Volatility Comparison

GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF (GMMA) has a higher volatility of 2.99% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC) at 0.16%. This indicates that GMMA'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

	GMMA	IBIC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.99%	0.16%	+2.83%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.87%	0.67%	+4.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.99%	0.89%	+5.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.32%	1.57%	+5.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.32%	1.57%	+5.75%

GMMA vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison

GMMA has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIC's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

GMMA vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison

GMMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.67%, more than IBIC's 3.59% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
GMMA GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF	3.67%	3.00%	0.57%	0.00%
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF	3.59%	4.43%	4.65%	0.83%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GMMA and IBIC in my portfolio?

GMMA and IBIC have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GMMA or IBIC?

GMMA has higher volatility (2.99%) compared to IBIC (0.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GMMA dropped -5.21% vs IBIC's -0.90%.

Which ETF is better, GMMA or IBIC?

On 1-year performance, GMMA leads with 9.99% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, GMMA or IBIC?

Over the 1-year period, GMMA has performed better with a 9.99% return vs 4.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GMMA or IBIC?

IBIC is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GMMA.

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

GMMA has the higher dividend yield at 3.67%, compared with 3.59% for IBIC.

What is the main difference between GMMA and IBIC?

GMMA is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. GMMA tracks MarketVector GammaRoad U.S. Equity Strategy Index, while IBIC tracks ICE 2026 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. They also come from different issuers: GammaRoad Capital Partners and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GMMA and 0.10% for IBIC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBIC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.94 vs 1.68), 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.