IBIF vs. ACWI

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

IBIF (iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF) and ACWI (iShares MSCI ACWI ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBIF is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2029 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index, while ACWI is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI All Country World Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IBIF returned 3.63% vs 29.31% for ACWI. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBIF charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.32%/yr for ACWI.

Performance

IBIF vs. ACWI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF (IBIF) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBIF achieves a 1.13% return, which is significantly lower than ACWI's 12.10% return.

IBIF

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: -0.31%
• YTD: 1.13%
• 6M: 1.18%
• 1Y: 3.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ACWI

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 1.68%
• YTD: 12.10%
• 6M: 11.90%
• 1Y: 29.31%
• 3Y*: 20.81%
• 5Y*: 11.34%
• 10Y*: 13.32%

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

IBIF vs. ACWI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
IBIF iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF	1.13%	7.27%	3.11%	3.95%
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	12.10%	22.41%	17.45%	8.27%

Correlation

The correlation between IBIF and ACWI is 0.08, 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	0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 21, 2023	0.11

Return for Risk

IBIF vs. ACWI — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBIF

IBIF Risk / Return Rank: 63
IBIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
IBIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
IBIF Omega Ratio Rank: 57
IBIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
IBIF Martin Ratio Rank: 67

ACWI

ACWI Risk / Return Rank: 69
ACWI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
ACWI Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
ACWI Omega Ratio Rank: 70
ACWI Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
ACWI Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

IBIF vs. ACWI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF (IBIF) and iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI). 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.

	IBIF	ACWI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.76	2.18	-0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.79	2.99	-0.20
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.40	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.84	3.03	+0.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.95	13.22	-1.27

IBIF vs. ACWI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBIF Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is comparable to the ACWI Sharpe Ratio of 2.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBIF and ACWI, 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

IBIF vs. ACWI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBIF drawdown since its inception was -2.50%, smaller than the maximum ACWI drawdown of -56.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBIF and ACWI.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBIF	ACWI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.50%	-56.00%	+53.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.95%	-9.73%	+8.78%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.55%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.42%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-33.53%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.88%	-0.85%	-0.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.55%	-8.59%	+8.04%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.30%	2.22%	-1.92%

Volatility

IBIF vs. ACWI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF (IBIF) is 0.75%, while iShares MSCI ACWI ETF (ACWI) has a volatility of 5.16%. This indicates that IBIF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ACWI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IBIF	ACWI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.75%	5.16%	-4.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.46%	11.20%	-9.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.07%	13.50%	-11.43%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.54%	16.17%	-12.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.54%	17.15%	-13.61%

IBIF vs. ACWI - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBIF has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than ACWI's 0.32% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBIF vs. ACWI - Dividend Comparison

IBIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.77%, more than ACWI's 1.42% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACWI iShares MSCI ACWI ETF	1.42%	1.55%	1.70%	1.88%	1.79%	1.71%	1.43%	2.33%	2.18%	1.94%	2.19%	2.56%
IBIF iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF	3.77%	4.51%	4.05%	0.96%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBIF and ACWI in my portfolio?

IBIF and ACWI have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IBIF or ACWI?

ACWI has higher volatility (5.16%) compared to IBIF (0.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBIF dropped -2.50% vs ACWI's -56.00%.

Which ETF is better, IBIF or ACWI?

On 1-year performance, ACWI leads with 29.31% vs 3.63% for IBIF. On fees, IBIF is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBIF has been the lower-risk option at 0.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IBIF or ACWI?

Over the 1-year period, ACWI has performed better with a 29.31% return vs 3.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBIF or ACWI?

IBIF is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for ACWI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBIF or ACWI?

IBIF has the higher dividend yield at 3.77%, compared with 1.42% for ACWI.

What is the main difference between IBIF and ACWI?

IBIF is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while ACWI is Global Equities. IBIF tracks ICE 2029 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index, while ACWI tracks MSCI All Country World Index. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for IBIF and 0.32% for ACWI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ACWI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.18 vs 1.76), 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.