IMCV vs. RBIL
IMCV (iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF) and RBIL (F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IMCV is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Value Index, while RBIL is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IMCV returned 23.41% vs 4.57% for RBIL. At a correlation of -0.11, they often move in opposite directions. IMCV charges 0.06%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for RBIL.
Performance
IMCV vs. RBIL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IMCV achieves a 9.96% return, which is significantly higher than RBIL's 2.70% return.
IMCV
- 1D
- -0.21%
- 1M
- 2.12%
- YTD
- 9.96%
- 6M
- 11.32%
- 1Y
- 23.41%
- 3Y*
- 16.66%
- 5Y*
- 8.69%
- 10Y*
- 10.40%
RBIL
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- 0.38%
- YTD
- 2.70%
- 6M
- 2.79%
- 1Y
- 4.57%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IMCV vs. RBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IMCV iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF | 9.96% | 10.86% |
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF | 2.70% | 2.91% |
Correlation
The correlation between IMCV and RBIL is -0.15, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.15 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 26, 2025 | -0.11 |
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
IMCV vs. RBIL — Risk / Return Rank
IMCV
RBIL
IMCV vs. RBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCV) and F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL). 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.
| IMCV | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.99 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -4.98 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 2.39 | -1.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.41 | 17.00 | -13.59 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.72 | 70.66 | -57.94 |
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
| IMCV | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.02 | 5.01 | -2.99 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.53 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.53 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.47 | 4.28 | -3.80 |
Drawdowns
IMCV vs. RBIL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IMCV drawdown since its inception was -64.74%, which is greater than RBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMCV and RBIL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IMCV | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -64.74% | -0.50% | -64.24% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.90% | -0.27% | -6.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.63% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.87% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -46.33% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.21% | 0.00% | -0.21% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.42% | -0.06% | -8.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.85% | 0.07% | +1.78% |
Volatility
IMCV vs. RBIL - Volatility Comparison
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCV) has a higher volatility of 2.56% compared to F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) at 0.30%. This indicates that IMCV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RBIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IMCV | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.56% | 0.30% | +2.26% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.00% | 0.79% | +7.21% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.63% | 0.92% | +10.71% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.63% | 1.05% | +15.58% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.66% | 1.05% | +18.61% |
IMCV vs. RBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison
IMCV has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than RBIL's 0.17% 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
IMCV vs. RBIL - Dividend Comparison
IMCV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.94%, less than RBIL's 4.60% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IMCV iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF | 1.94% | 2.23% | 2.36% | 2.30% | 2.36% | 1.86% | 2.61% | 2.45% | 2.61% | 1.87% | 2.09% | 2.29% |
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF | 4.60% | 3.65% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IMCV and RBIL have a correlation of -0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IMCV has higher volatility (2.56%) compared to RBIL (0.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMCV dropped -64.74% vs RBIL's -0.50%.
On 1-year performance, IMCV leads with 23.41% vs 4.57% for RBIL. On fees, IMCV is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, RBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, IMCV has performed better with a 23.41% return vs 4.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IMCV is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.17% for RBIL.
RBIL has the higher dividend yield at 4.60%, compared with 1.94% for IMCV.
IMCV is categorized as Mid Cap Value Equities, while RBIL is Inflation-Protected Bonds. IMCV tracks Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Value Index, while RBIL tracks Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and F/m. Their fees differ too: 0.06% for IMCV and 0.17% for RBIL.
RBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.01 vs 2.02), 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.
Find the right allocation for IMCV and RBIL
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