IBIF vs. FBDC
IBIF (iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF) and FBDC (FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBIF is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2029 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index, while FBDC is a Financials Equities fund actively managed by First Trust. IBIF is passively managed, while FBDC is actively managed. At a 0.05 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBIF charges 0.10%/yr vs 1.35%/yr for FBDC.
Performance
IBIF vs. FBDC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IBIF achieves a 1.81% return, which is significantly higher than FBDC's -7.17% return.
IBIF
- 1D
- -0.09%
- 1M
- -0.08%
- YTD
- 1.81%
- 6M
- 1.76%
- 1Y
- 4.69%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FBDC
- 1D
- 2.59%
- 1M
- -5.28%
- YTD
- -7.17%
- 6M
- -8.43%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IBIF vs. FBDC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IBIF iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF | 1.81% | 2.01% |
FBDC FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF | -7.17% | -2.43% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBIF and FBDC 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 Jul 1, 2025 | 0.05 |
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
IBIF vs. FBDC — Risk / Return Rank
IBIF
FBDC
IBIF vs. FBDC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF (IBIF) and FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF (FBDC). 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 | FBDC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.46 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.96 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn 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. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IBIF | FBDC | 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 | -0.56 | +2.26 |
Drawdowns
IBIF vs. FBDC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBIF drawdown since its inception was -2.50%, smaller than the maximum FBDC drawdown of -20.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBIF and FBDC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBIF | FBDC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.50% | -20.60% | +18.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.95% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.21% | -15.10% | +14.89% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.55% | -10.16% | +9.61% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.29% | — | — |
Volatility
IBIF vs. FBDC - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBIF | FBDC | 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% | 18.22% | -16.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.54% | 18.22% | -14.68% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.54% | 18.22% | -14.68% |
IBIF vs. FBDC - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBIF has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than FBDC's 1.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
IBIF vs. FBDC - Dividend Comparison
IBIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.74%, less than FBDC's 11.23% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FBDC FT Confluence BDC & Specialty Finance Income ETF | 11.23% | 5.41% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IBIF iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF | 3.74% | 4.51% | 4.05% | 0.96% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IBIF and FBDC 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.
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.
IBIF is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 1.35% for FBDC.
FBDC has the higher dividend yield at 11.23%, compared with 3.74% for IBIF.
IBIF is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while FBDC is Financials Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for IBIF and 1.35% for FBDC.
Find the right allocation for IBIF and FBDC
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