IAT vs. FDIQ
IAT (iShares U.S. Regional Banks ETF) and FDIQ (Invesco Bloomberg Financial Data Providers ETF) are both Financials Equities funds - IAT tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Select Regional Banks Index while FDIQ tracks the Bloomberg Financial Data Providers Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IAT returned 9.74%/yr vs 7.93%/yr for FDIQ. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IAT charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for FDIQ.
Performance
IAT vs. FDIQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IAT achieves a 11.98% return, which is significantly higher than FDIQ's 5.60% return. Over the past 10 years, IAT has outperformed FDIQ with an annualized return of 9.74%, while FDIQ has yielded a comparatively lower 7.93% annualized return.
IAT
- 1D
- 1.65%
- 1M
- 7.24%
- YTD
- 11.98%
- 6M
- 9.77%
- 1Y
- 31.31%
- 3Y*
- 27.52%
- 5Y*
- 4.34%
- 10Y*
- 9.74%
FDIQ
- 1D
- -0.09%
- 1M
- -7.75%
- YTD
- 5.60%
- 6M
- 2.65%
- 1Y
- 17.57%
- 3Y*
- 18.68%
- 5Y*
- 3.92%
- 10Y*
- 7.93%
IAT vs. FDIQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IAT iShares U.S. Regional Banks ETF | 11.98% | 13.05% | 24.36% | -8.53% | -20.61% | 38.89% | -7.60% | 31.38% | -17.45% | 10.42% |
FDIQ Invesco Bloomberg Financial Data Providers ETF | 5.60% | 6.32% | 12.76% | -0.84% | -7.23% | 36.05% | -8.95% | 23.57% | -18.31% | 1.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between IAT and FDIQ is 0.70, 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 | 0.71 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.87 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.92 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 1, 2011 | 0.90 |
The correlation between IAT and FDIQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.70 (1 year) to 0.92 (10 years), 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
IAT vs. FDIQ — Risk / Return Rank
IAT
FDIQ
IAT vs. FDIQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares U.S. Regional Banks ETF (IAT) and Invesco Bloomberg Financial Data Providers ETF (FDIQ). 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.
| IAT | FDIQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.63 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.70 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.26 | 1.16 | +0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.80 | 1.48 | +0.32 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.57 | 3.67 | +0.90 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IAT vs. FDIQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IAT drawdown since its inception was -77.22%, which is greater than FDIQ's maximum drawdown of -52.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IAT and FDIQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IAT | FDIQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -77.22% | -52.86% | -24.36% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -17.49% | -11.96% | -5.53% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -29.29% | -28.09% | -1.20% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -55.55% | -42.99% | -12.56% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -55.55% | -52.86% | -2.69% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.69% | -11.96% | +10.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -26.91% | -11.54% | -15.37% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.87% | 4.79% | +2.08% |
Volatility
IAT vs. FDIQ - Volatility Comparison
iShares U.S. Regional Banks ETF (IAT) has a higher volatility of 6.82% compared to Invesco Bloomberg Financial Data Providers ETF (FDIQ) at 5.49%. This indicates that IAT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FDIQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IAT | FDIQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.82% | 5.49% | +1.33% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.15% | 14.13% | +2.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.02% | 22.13% | -0.11% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.96% | 28.54% | +0.42% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.73% | 31.05% | -0.32% |
IAT vs. FDIQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
IAT has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is higher than FDIQ's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
IAT vs. FDIQ - Dividend Comparison
IAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.65%, more than FDIQ's 2.36% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FDIQ Invesco Bloomberg Financial Data Providers ETF | 2.36% | 2.66% | 2.69% | 2.89% | 2.51% | 2.04% | 2.92% | 2.44% | 2.45% | 1.59% | 1.50% | 1.92% |
IAT iShares U.S. Regional Banks ETF | 2.65% | 2.94% | 2.95% | 3.56% | 3.12% | 1.88% | 2.87% | 2.49% | 2.48% | 1.55% | 1.52% | 1.78% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IAT and FDIQ have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IAT has higher volatility (6.82%) compared to FDIQ (5.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IAT dropped -77.22% vs FDIQ's -52.86%.
On 10-year performance, IAT leads with 9.74% vs 7.93% for FDIQ. On fees, FDIQ is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, FDIQ has been the lower-risk option at 5.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, IAT has performed better with a 9.74% return vs 7.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FDIQ is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.42% for IAT.
IAT has the higher dividend yield at 2.65%, compared with 2.36% for FDIQ.
IAT tracks Dow Jones U.S. Select Regional Banks Index, while FDIQ tracks Bloomberg Financial Data Providers Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for IAT and 0.35% for FDIQ.
IAT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 vs 0.80), 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 IAT and FDIQ
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