IBIF vs. EMKT

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

IBIF (iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF) and EMKT (Lazard Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBIF is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2029 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index, while EMKT is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by Lazard. IBIF is passively managed, while EMKT is actively managed. At a 0.05 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBIF charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for EMKT.

Performance

IBIF vs. EMKT - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBIF achieves a 1.81% return, which is significantly lower than EMKT's 29.02% return.

IBIF

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: -0.08%
• YTD: 1.81%
• 6M: 1.76%
• 1Y: 4.69%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EMKT

• 1D: -0.77%
• 1M: 8.13%
• YTD: 29.02%
• 6M: 30.63%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IBIF vs. EMKT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
IBIF iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF	1.81%	-0.18%
EMKT Lazard Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF	29.02%	-1.29%

Correlation

The correlation between IBIF and EMKT 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 28, 2025	0.05

Return for Risk

IBIF vs. EMKT — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBIF

IBIF Risk / Return Rank: 82
IBIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
IBIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
IBIF Omega Ratio Rank: 79
IBIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
IBIF Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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. EMKT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF (IBIF) and Lazard Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF (EMKT). 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.

	IBIF	EMKT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.33	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.93	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.96	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.65	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IBIF	EMKT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.33	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.70	2.22	-0.52

Drawdowns

IBIF vs. EMKT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBIF drawdown since its inception was -2.50%, smaller than the maximum EMKT drawdown of -14.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBIF and EMKT.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBIF	EMKT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.50%	-14.21%	+11.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.95%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.21%	-2.21%	+2.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.55%	-3.04%	+2.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.29%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	IBIF	EMKT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.45%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.33%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.03%	22.42%	-20.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.54%	22.42%	-18.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.54%	22.42%	-18.88%

IBIF vs. EMKT - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBIF has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than EMKT's 0.74% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBIF vs. EMKT - Dividend Comparison

IBIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.74%, while EMKT has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
EMKT Lazard Emerging Markets Opportunities ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IBIF iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF	3.74%	4.51%	4.05%	0.96%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBIF and EMKT in my portfolio?

IBIF and EMKT 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.

Which ETF is better, IBIF or EMKT?

On fees, IBIF is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBIF or EMKT?

IBIF is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for EMKT.

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

IBIF has the higher dividend yield at 3.74%, compared with 0.00% for EMKT.

What is the main difference between IBIF and EMKT?

IBIF is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while EMKT is Emerging Markets Diversified. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Lazard. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for IBIF and 0.74% for EMKT.