IBD vs. FLTR
IBD (Inspire Corporate Bond Impact ETF) and FLTR (VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF) are both Corporate Bonds funds - IBD tracks the Inspire Corporate Bond Impact Equal Weight Index while FLTR tracks the MVIS US Investment Grade Floating Rate Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IBD returned 1.30%/yr vs 4.49%/yr for FLTR. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBD charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for FLTR.
Performance
IBD vs. FLTR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IBD achieves a -0.18% return, which is significantly lower than FLTR's 1.91% return.
IBD
- 1D
- -0.19%
- 1M
- -0.01%
- YTD
- -0.18%
- 6M
- 0.16%
- 1Y
- 4.61%
- 3Y*
- 5.01%
- 5Y*
- 1.30%
- 10Y*
- —
FLTR
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 0.46%
- YTD
- 1.91%
- 6M
- 2.40%
- 1Y
- 5.30%
- 3Y*
- 6.10%
- 5Y*
- 4.49%
- 10Y*
- 3.51%
IBD vs. FLTR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBD Inspire Corporate Bond Impact ETF | -0.18% | 7.70% | 3.58% | 6.00% | -8.94% | -1.89% | 5.15% | 7.97% | -1.18% | 1.32% |
FLTR VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF | 1.91% | 5.22% | 7.38% | 7.41% | 0.74% | 0.55% | 1.44% | 5.70% | 0.30% | 1.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBD and FLTR is 0.05, 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 | 0.05 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.04 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.07 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 12, 2017 | 0.07 |
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
IBD vs. FLTR — Risk / Return Rank
IBD
FLTR
IBD vs. FLTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Inspire Corporate Bond Impact ETF (IBD) and VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF (FLTR). 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.
| IBD | FLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -5.67 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -11.11 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.19 | 3.15 | -1.96 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.15 | 16.96 | -14.81 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.66 | 101.23 | -94.57 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IBD | FLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.10 | 6.77 | -5.67 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.23 | 2.11 | -1.88 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.70 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.31 | 0.53 | -0.22 |
Drawdowns
IBD vs. FLTR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBD drawdown since its inception was -16.30%, smaller than the maximum FLTR drawdown of -17.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBD and FLTR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBD | FLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.30% | -17.84% | +1.54% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.15% | -0.31% | -1.84% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -4.01% | -1.93% | -2.08% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -14.76% | -3.06% | -11.70% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -17.84% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.04% | -0.04% | -1.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.36% | -0.67% | -2.69% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.69% | 0.05% | +0.64% |
Volatility
IBD vs. FLTR - Volatility Comparison
Inspire Corporate Bond Impact ETF (IBD) has a higher volatility of 1.03% compared to VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF (FLTR) at 0.25%. This indicates that IBD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBD | FLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.03% | 0.25% | +0.78% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.83% | 0.62% | +2.21% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.21% | 0.79% | +3.42% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.60% | 2.13% | +3.47% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.70% | 5.00% | +1.70% |
IBD vs. FLTR - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBD has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than FLTR's 0.14% expense ratio.
Dividends
IBD vs. FLTR - Dividend Comparison
IBD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.25%, less than FLTR's 4.73% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLTR VanEck Vectors Investment Grade Floating Rate ETF | 4.73% | 4.97% | 5.93% | 6.07% | 2.29% | 0.63% | 1.49% | 3.05% | 2.67% | 1.69% | 1.16% | 0.71% |
IBD Inspire Corporate Bond Impact ETF | 4.25% | 4.17% | 4.18% | 3.39% | 1.75% | 1.36% | 1.63% | 2.47% | 2.06% | 0.82% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IBD and FLTR have a correlation of 0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IBD has higher volatility (1.03%) compared to FLTR (0.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBD dropped -16.30% vs FLTR's -17.84%.
On 5-year performance, FLTR leads with 4.49% vs 1.30% for IBD. On fees, FLTR is cheaper at 0.14% per year. On volatility, FLTR has been the lower-risk option at 0.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FLTR has performed better with a 4.49% return vs 1.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FLTR is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for IBD.
FLTR has the higher dividend yield at 4.73%, compared with 4.25% for IBD.
IBD tracks Inspire Corporate Bond Impact Equal Weight Index, while FLTR tracks MVIS US Investment Grade Floating Rate Index. They also come from different issuers: Inspire and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for IBD and 0.14% for FLTR.
FLTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.77 vs 1.10), 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 IBD and FLTR
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