HIPS vs. INCM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

HIPS (GraniteShares HIPS US High Income ETF) and INCM (Franklin Income Focus ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. HIPS is passively managed, while INCM is actively managed. Over the past year, HIPS returned 6.18% vs 15.73% for INCM. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HIPS charges 3.19%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for INCM.

Performance

HIPS vs. INCM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares HIPS US High Income ETF (HIPS) and Franklin Income Focus ETF (INCM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HIPS achieves a 3.28% return, which is significantly lower than INCM's 6.45% return.

HIPS

• 1D: -0.79%
• 1M: -3.49%
• YTD: 3.28%
• 6M: 2.30%
• 1Y: 6.18%
• 3Y*: 10.94%
• 5Y*: 3.96%
• 10Y*: 5.55%

INCM

• 1D: -0.48%
• 1M: 0.70%
• YTD: 6.45%
• 6M: 6.84%
• 1Y: 15.73%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

HIPS vs. INCM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
HIPS GraniteShares HIPS US High Income ETF	3.28%	1.00%	13.71%	12.11%
INCM Franklin Income Focus ETF	6.45%	13.07%	6.80%	5.76%

Correlation

The correlation between HIPS and INCM is 0.55, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 9, 2023	0.55

The correlation between HIPS and INCM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

HIPS vs. INCM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HIPS	INCM
Energy	32.7%	3.8%
Real Estate	31.7%	0.0%
Financial Services	31.6%	8.2%
Basic Materials	4.0%	1.9%
Communication Services	0.0%	1.7%
Consumer Cyclical	-	1.5%
Consumer Defensive	-	6.7%
Healthcare	-	2.6%
Industrials	-	1.9%
Technology	-	2.4%
Utilities	-	4.9%

Return for Risk

HIPS vs. INCM — Risk / Return Rank

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

HIPS

HIPS Risk / Return Rank: 20
HIPS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
HIPS Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
HIPS Omega Ratio Rank: 18
HIPS Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
HIPS Martin Ratio Rank: 22

INCM

INCM Risk / Return Rank: 89
INCM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
INCM Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
INCM Omega Ratio Rank: 89
INCM Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
INCM Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

HIPS vs. INCM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares HIPS US High Income ETF (HIPS) and Franklin Income Focus ETF (INCM). 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.

	HIPS	INCM	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.65	3.01	-2.36
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.97	4.49	-3.52
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	1.57	-0.46
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.01	4.95	-3.94
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	2.70	20.86	-18.15
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HIPS vs. INCM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HIPS Sharpe Ratio is 0.65, which is lower than the INCM Sharpe Ratio of 3.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HIPS and INCM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	HIPS	INCM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.65	3.01	-2.36
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.30	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.31	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.23	1.51	-1.28

Drawdowns

HIPS vs. INCM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HIPS drawdown since its inception was -53.14%, which is greater than INCM's maximum drawdown of -7.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HIPS and INCM.

Drawdown Indicators

	HIPS	INCM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.14%	-7.84%	-45.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.15%	-3.19%	-2.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.41%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.28%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-53.14%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.23%	-0.75%	-3.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.39%	-1.09%	-6.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.29%	0.76%	+1.53%

Volatility

HIPS vs. INCM - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares HIPS US High Income ETF (HIPS) has a higher volatility of 1.77% compared to Franklin Income Focus ETF (INCM) at 1.66%. This indicates that HIPS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than INCM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HIPS	INCM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.77%	1.66%	+0.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.05%	3.82%	+3.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.57%	5.25%	+4.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.29%	7.23%	+6.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.07%	7.23%	+10.84%

HIPS vs. INCM - Expense Ratio Comparison

HIPS has a 3.19% expense ratio, which is higher than INCM's 0.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

HIPS vs. INCM - Dividend Comparison

HIPS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.19%, more than INCM's 5.08% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
HIPS GraniteShares HIPS US High Income ETF	11.19%	11.04%	10.04%	10.32%	10.76%	8.43%	9.50%	6.93%	8.66%	7.28%	7.20%	8.17%
INCM Franklin Income Focus ETF	5.08%	4.96%	5.06%	3.01%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HIPS and INCM in my portfolio?

HIPS and INCM have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HIPS or INCM?

HIPS has higher volatility (1.77%) compared to INCM (1.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HIPS dropped -53.14% vs INCM's -7.84%.

Which ETF is better, HIPS or INCM?

On 1-year performance, INCM leads with 15.73% vs 6.18% for HIPS. On fees, INCM is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, INCM has been the lower-risk option at 1.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, HIPS or INCM?

Over the 1-year period, INCM has performed better with a 15.73% return vs 6.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HIPS or INCM?

INCM is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 3.19% for HIPS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, HIPS or INCM?

HIPS has the higher dividend yield at 11.19%, compared with 5.08% for INCM.

What is the main difference between HIPS and INCM?

They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 3.19% for HIPS and 0.38% for INCM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

INCM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.01 vs 0.65), 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.