PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IBII vs. GTIP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IBII vs. GTIP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds Oct 2032 Term TIPS ETF (IBII) and Goldman Sachs Access Inflation Protected USD Bond ETF (GTIP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

As of year-to-date, both investments have demonstrated similar returns, with IBII at 1.63% and GTIP at 1.63%.


IBII

1D
0.02%
1M
-0.38%
YTD
1.63%
6M
1.21%
1Y
5.28%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

GTIP

1D
-0.07%
1M
0.05%
YTD
1.63%
6M
1.20%
1Y
4.60%
3Y*
3.93%
5Y*
1.07%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IBII vs. GTIP - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
IBII
iShares iBonds Oct 2032 Term TIPS ETF
1.63%8.65%1.21%4.85%
GTIP
Goldman Sachs Access Inflation Protected USD Bond ETF
1.63%6.63%2.04%3.86%

Correlation

The correlation between IBII and GTIP is 0.93, 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

0.93

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

0.97

The correlation between IBII and GTIP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.97 - 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

IBII vs. GTIP — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBII
IBII Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
IBII Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4646
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBII Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBII Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
IBII Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBII Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank

GTIP
GTIP Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
GTIP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GTIP Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
GTIP Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
GTIP Calmar Ratio Rank: 4646
Calmar Ratio Rank
GTIP Martin Ratio Rank: 4545
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.

IBII vs. GTIP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Oct 2032 Term TIPS ETF (IBII) and Goldman Sachs Access Inflation Protected USD Bond ETF (GTIP). 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.


IBIIGTIPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.17

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.27

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.25

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.68

2.29

+0.39

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.32

7.26

+2.06

IBII vs. GTIP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBII Sharpe Ratio is 1.56, which is comparable to the GTIP Sharpe Ratio of 1.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBII and GTIP, 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


IBIIGTIPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.56

1.39

+0.17

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.18

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.12

0.56

+0.57

Drawdowns

IBII vs. GTIP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBII drawdown since its inception was -4.65%, smaller than the maximum GTIP drawdown of -14.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBII and GTIP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IBIIGTIPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-4.65%

-14.31%

+9.66%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.98%

-2.02%

+0.04%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-4.47%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.31%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.65%

-0.24%

-0.41%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.12%

-4.23%

+3.11%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.58%

0.64%

-0.06%

Volatility

IBII vs. GTIP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares iBonds Oct 2032 Term TIPS ETF (IBII) is 0.89%, while Goldman Sachs Access Inflation Protected USD Bond ETF (GTIP) has a volatility of 0.97%. This indicates that IBII experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GTIP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IBIIGTIPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.89%

0.97%

-0.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.29%

2.32%

-0.03%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.42%

3.34%

+0.08%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.42%

6.06%

-0.64%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.42%

6.01%

-0.59%

IBII vs. GTIP - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBII has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than GTIP's 0.12% 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

IBII vs. GTIP - Dividend Comparison

IBII's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.05%, less than GTIP's 4.69% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
GTIP
Goldman Sachs Access Inflation Protected USD Bond ETF
4.69%4.58%3.52%2.77%6.47%3.82%1.04%2.34%0.66%
IBII
iShares iBonds Oct 2032 Term TIPS ETF
4.05%4.80%4.76%1.10%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.93, IBII and GTIP move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

GTIP has higher volatility (0.97%) compared to IBII (0.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBII dropped -4.65% vs GTIP's -14.31%.

On 1-year performance, IBII leads with 5.28% vs 4.60% for GTIP. On fees, IBII is cheaper at 0.10% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, IBII has performed better with a 5.28% return vs 4.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IBII is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.12% for GTIP.

GTIP has the higher dividend yield at 4.69%, compared with 4.05% for IBII.

IBII tracks ICE 2032 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index, while GTIP tracks FTSE Goldman Sachs Treasury Inflation Protected USD Bond Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for IBII and 0.12% for GTIP.

IBII currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.56 vs 1.39), 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 IBII and GTIP

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