IWMW vs. IBIC

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

IWMW (iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF) and IBIC (iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IWMW is a Derivative Income fund tracking the Cboe FTSE Russell IWM 2% OTM BuyWrite Index, while IBIC is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2026 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IWMW returned 27.06% vs 4.38% for IBIC. At a correlation of -0.10, they often move in opposite directions. IWMW charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for IBIC.

Performance

IWMW vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) and iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IWMW achieves a 12.27% return, which is significantly higher than IBIC's 2.39% return.

IWMW

• 1D: 0.51%
• 1M: 4.71%
• YTD: 12.27%
• 6M: 10.86%
• 1Y: 27.06%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IBIC

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: 0.08%
• YTD: 2.39%
• 6M: 2.49%
• 1Y: 4.38%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IWMW vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IWMW iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF	12.27%	7.82%	5.85%
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF	2.39%	4.96%	4.67%

Correlation

The correlation between IWMW and IBIC 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 Mar 15, 2024	-0.10

Return for Risk

IWMW vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank

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

IWMW

IWMW Risk / Return Rank: 73
IWMW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
IWMW Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
IWMW Omega Ratio Rank: 77
IWMW Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
IWMW Martin Ratio Rank: 74

IBIC

IBIC Risk / Return Rank: 98
IBIC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
IBIC Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
IBIC Omega Ratio Rank: 98
IBIC Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
IBIC Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

IWMW vs. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) and iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC). 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.

	IWMW	IBIC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.18	4.94	-2.77
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.94	8.90	-5.95
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	2.21	-0.78
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.91	16.41	-12.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.51	58.11	-44.60

IWMW vs. IBIC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IWMW Sharpe Ratio is 2.18, which is lower than the IBIC Sharpe Ratio of 4.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IWMW and IBIC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

IWMW vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IWMW drawdown since its inception was -21.82%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IWMW and IBIC.

Drawdown Indicators

	IWMW	IBIC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.82%	-0.90%	-20.92%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.94%	-0.27%	-6.67%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.11%	+0.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.77%	-0.10%	-3.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.01%	0.08%	+1.93%

Volatility

IWMW vs. IBIC - Volatility Comparison

iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF (IWMW) has a higher volatility of 3.38% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC) at 0.16%. This indicates that IWMW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBIC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IWMW	IBIC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.38%	0.16%	+3.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.29%	0.67%	+8.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.52%	0.89%	+11.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.08%	1.57%	+14.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.08%	1.57%	+14.51%

IWMW vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison

IWMW has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIC's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

IWMW vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison

IWMW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 21.64%, more than IBIC's 3.59% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF	3.59%	4.43%	4.65%	0.83%
IWMW iShares Russell 2000 BuyWrite ETF	21.64%	20.98%	17.73%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IWMW and IBIC in my portfolio?

IWMW and IBIC 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.

Which is riskier, IWMW or IBIC?

IWMW has higher volatility (3.38%) compared to IBIC (0.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IWMW dropped -21.82% vs IBIC's -0.90%.

Which ETF is better, IWMW or IBIC?

On 1-year performance, IWMW leads with 27.06% vs 4.38% for IBIC. On fees, IBIC is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBIC has been the lower-risk option at 0.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IWMW or IBIC?

Over the 1-year period, IWMW has performed better with a 27.06% return vs 4.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IWMW or IBIC?

IBIC is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for IWMW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IWMW or IBIC?

IWMW has the higher dividend yield at 21.64%, compared with 3.59% for IBIC.

What is the main difference between IWMW and IBIC?

IWMW is categorized as Derivative Income, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. IWMW tracks Cboe FTSE Russell IWM 2% OTM BuyWrite Index, while IBIC tracks ICE 2026 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for IWMW and 0.10% for IBIC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBIC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.94 vs 2.18), 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.