IBIF vs. TMH
IBIF (iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF) and TMH (Toyota Motor Corporation ADRhedged) are both exchange-traded funds - IBIF is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2029 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index, while TMH is a Consumer Discretionary Equities fund tracking the Toyota Motor Corporation Local Shares Total Return. Both are passively managed. Their 0.28 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. IBIF charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for TMH.
Performance
IBIF vs. TMH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
IBIF
- 1D
- -0.11%
- 1M
- 0.14%
- 6M
- 0.80%
- YTD
- 1.50%
- 1Y
- 2.58%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 5.55%
TMH
- 1D
- -1.19%
- 1M
- 6.96%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $539.78K | $483.63K | $471.28K | |
| $27.07K | $29.18K | $21.96K |
IBIF vs. TMH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
IBIF iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF | -0.17% |
TMH Toyota Motor Corporation ADRhedged | 0.72% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBIF and TMH is 0.28, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2026 | 0.28 |
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. TMH — Risk / Return Rank
IBIF
TMH
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
IBIF vs. TMH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF (IBIF) and Toyota Motor Corporation ADRhedged (TMH). 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 | TMH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.29 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.69 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IBIF vs. TMH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBIF drawdown since its inception was -2.50%, smaller than the maximum TMH drawdown of -10.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBIF and TMH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBIF | TMH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.50% | -10.32% | +7.82% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.95% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.51% | -4.33% | +3.82% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.55% | -5.05% | +4.50% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.36% | — | — |
Volatility
IBIF vs. TMH - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IBIF | TMH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.47% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.47% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.02% | 26.85% | -24.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.48% | 26.85% | -23.37% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.48% | 26.85% | -23.37% |
IBIF vs. TMH - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBIF has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than TMH's 0.19% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
IBIF vs. TMH - Dividend Comparison
IBIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.94%, more than TMH's 4.73% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
IBIF iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF | 4.94% | 4.51% | 4.05% | 0.96% |
TMH Toyota Motor Corporation ADRhedged | 4.73% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IBIF and TMH have a correlation of 0.28, 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 0.19% for TMH.
IBIF has the higher dividend yield at 4.94%, compared with 4.73% for TMH.
IBIF is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while TMH is Consumer Discretionary Equities. IBIF tracks ICE 2029 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index, while TMH tracks Toyota Motor Corporation Local Shares Total Return. They also come from different issuers: iShares and ADRhedged. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for IBIF and 0.19% for TMH.
Find the right allocation for IBIF and TMH
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