PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IBIG vs. SCHP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IBIG vs. SCHP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds Oct 2030 Term TIPS ETF (IBIG) and Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF (SCHP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with IBIG having a 1.60% return and SCHP slightly higher at 1.61%.


IBIG

1D
-0.04%
1M
-0.25%
YTD
1.60%
6M
1.46%
1Y
4.77%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

SCHP

1D
0.00%
1M
0.05%
YTD
1.61%
6M
1.25%
1Y
4.83%
3Y*
3.99%
5Y*
1.13%
10Y*
2.66%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IBIG vs. SCHP - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
IBIG
iShares iBonds Oct 2030 Term TIPS ETF
1.60%7.90%2.60%4.26%
SCHP
Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF
1.61%6.76%1.95%4.05%

Correlation

The correlation between IBIG and SCHP is 0.87, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2023

0.92

The correlation between IBIG and SCHP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

IBIG vs. SCHP — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBIG
IBIG Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
IBIG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBIG Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBIG Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
IBIG Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBIG Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank

SCHP
SCHP Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
SCHP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4343
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SCHP Sortino Ratio Rank: 4646
Sortino Ratio Rank
SCHP Omega Ratio Rank: 4242
Omega Ratio Rank
SCHP Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
SCHP Martin Ratio Rank: 4747
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.

IBIG vs. SCHP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Oct 2030 Term TIPS ETF (IBIG) and Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF (SCHP). 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.


IBIGSCHPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.36

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.65

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.26

+0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.55

2.51

+1.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.17

7.67

+4.50

IBIG vs. SCHP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBIG Sharpe Ratio is 1.84, which is comparable to the SCHP Sharpe Ratio of 1.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBIG and SCHP, 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


IBIGSCHPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.84

1.48

+0.36

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.19

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.48

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.43

0.51

+0.92

Drawdowns

IBIG vs. SCHP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBIG drawdown since its inception was -3.21%, smaller than the maximum SCHP drawdown of -14.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBIG and SCHP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IBIGSCHPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-3.21%

-14.26%

+11.05%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.35%

-1.93%

+0.58%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-4.48%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.26%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-14.26%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.47%

-0.25%

-0.22%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.77%

-3.94%

+3.17%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.40%

0.63%

-0.23%

Volatility

IBIG vs. SCHP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBonds Oct 2030 Term TIPS ETF (IBIG) is 0.60%, while Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF (SCHP) has a volatility of 0.89%. This indicates that IBIG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCHP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IBIGSCHPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.60%

0.89%

-0.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.70%

2.20%

-0.50%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.61%

3.29%

-0.68%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.28%

6.12%

-1.84%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.28%

5.59%

-1.31%

IBIG vs. SCHP - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBIG has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHP's 0.03% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

IBIG vs. SCHP - Dividend Comparison

IBIG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.89%, less than SCHP's 3.99% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IBIG
iShares iBonds Oct 2030 Term TIPS ETF
3.89%4.70%4.15%0.78%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
SCHP
Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF
3.99%4.06%2.99%3.02%7.19%4.39%1.11%2.02%2.26%1.90%1.38%0.28%

Frequently Asked Questions


IBIG and SCHP have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SCHP has higher volatility (0.89%) compared to IBIG (0.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBIG dropped -3.21% vs SCHP's -14.26%.

On 1-year performance, SCHP leads with 4.83% vs 4.77% for IBIG. On fees, SCHP is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, IBIG has been the lower-risk option at 0.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, SCHP has performed better with a 4.83% return vs 4.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SCHP is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.10% for IBIG.

SCHP has the higher dividend yield at 3.99%, compared with 3.89% for IBIG.

IBIG tracks ICE 2030 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index, while SCHP tracks Bloomberg US Treasury Inflation-Linked Bond Index (Series-L). They also come from different issuers: iShares and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for IBIG and 0.03% for SCHP.

IBIG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.84 vs 1.48), 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 IBIG and SCHP

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