PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IBIF vs. SEMG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IBIF vs. SEMG - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBIF achieves a 1.81% return, which is significantly higher than SEMG's -2.15% return.


IBIF

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

SEMG

1D
0.76%
1M
2.69%
YTD
-2.15%
6M
-1.09%
1Y
3.92%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IBIF vs. SEMG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
IBIF
iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF
1.81%3.46%
SEMG
Suncoast Select Growth ETF
-2.15%8.27%

Correlation

The correlation between IBIF and SEMG is -0.03, 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

-0.03

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 15, 2025

-0.01

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. SEMG — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBIF
IBIF Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
IBIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBIF Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
IBIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBIF Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

SEMG
SEMG Risk / Return Rank: 1313
Overall Rank
SEMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SEMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 1313
Sortino Ratio Rank
SEMG Omega Ratio Rank: 1313
Omega Ratio Rank
SEMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 1212
Calmar Ratio Rank
SEMG Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank
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. SEMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


IBIFSEMGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.02

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+3.43

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.46

1.06

+0.40

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.96

0.25

+4.71

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.65

0.80

+15.85

IBIF vs. SEMG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBIF Sharpe Ratio is 2.33, which is higher than the SEMG Sharpe Ratio of 0.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBIF and SEMG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IBIFSEMGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.33

0.30

+2.02

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.70

0.43

+1.27

Drawdowns

IBIF vs. SEMG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBIF drawdown since its inception was -2.50%, smaller than the maximum SEMG drawdown of -15.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBIF and SEMG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IBIFSEMGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-2.50%

-15.80%

+13.30%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.95%

-15.80%

+14.85%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.21%

-3.13%

+2.92%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.55%

-3.35%

+2.80%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.29%

4.93%

-4.64%

Volatility

IBIF vs. SEMG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF (IBIF) is 0.45%, while Suncoast Select Growth ETF (SEMG) has a volatility of 3.20%. This indicates that IBIF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SEMG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IBIFSEMGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.45%

3.20%

-2.75%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.33%

9.91%

-8.58%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.03%

13.05%

-11.02%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.54%

13.00%

-9.46%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.54%

13.00%

-9.46%

IBIF vs. SEMG - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBIF has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than SEMG's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

IBIF vs. SEMG - Dividend Comparison

IBIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.74%, more than SEMG's 0.05% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
IBIF
iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF
3.74%4.51%4.05%0.96%
SEMG
Suncoast Select Growth ETF
0.05%0.05%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


IBIF and SEMG have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SEMG has higher volatility (3.20%) compared to IBIF (0.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBIF dropped -2.50% vs SEMG's -15.80%.

On 1-year performance, IBIF leads with 4.69% vs 3.92% for SEMG. On fees, IBIF is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBIF has been the lower-risk option at 0.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, IBIF has performed better with a 4.69% return vs 3.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IBIF is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for SEMG.

IBIF has the higher dividend yield at 3.74%, compared with 0.05% for SEMG.

IBIF is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while SEMG is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Suncoast. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for IBIF and 0.60% for SEMG.

IBIF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 vs 0.30), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IBIF and SEMG

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