PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
JULH vs. IBIC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

JULH vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Premium Income 20 Barrier ETF - July (JULH) and iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with JULH having a 2.40% return and IBIC slightly lower at 2.39%.


JULH

1D
0.02%
1M
0.26%
YTD
2.40%
6M
0.84%
1Y
5.09%
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)

JULH vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
JULH
Innovator Premium Income 20 Barrier ETF - July
2.40%5.39%6.93%2.67%
IBIC
iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF
2.39%4.96%5.25%2.17%

Correlation

The correlation between JULH and IBIC is -0.12, 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

-0.12

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2023

-0.04

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

JULH vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank

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

JULH
JULH Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
JULH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JULH Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
JULH Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
JULH Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
JULH Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
Martin Ratio Rank

IBIC
IBIC Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
IBIC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBIC Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBIC Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
IBIC Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBIC Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
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.

JULH vs. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Premium Income 20 Barrier ETF - July (JULH) 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.


JULHIBICDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-3.11

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-6.57

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

2.21

-0.74

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.97

16.41

-13.45

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.51

58.11

-50.60

JULH vs. IBIC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JULH Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is lower than the IBIC Sharpe Ratio of 4.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JULH 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

JULH vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JULH drawdown since its inception was -5.51%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULH and IBIC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


JULHIBICDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-5.51%

-0.90%

-4.61%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.72%

-0.27%

-1.45%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.11%

+0.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.27%

-0.10%

-0.17%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.68%

0.08%

+0.60%

Volatility

JULH vs. IBIC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Premium Income 20 Barrier ETF - July (JULH) is 0.09%, while iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC) has a volatility of 0.16%. This indicates that JULH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IBIC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


JULHIBICDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.09%

0.16%

-0.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.24%

0.67%

+1.57%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.80%

0.89%

+1.91%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.72%

1.57%

+3.15%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.72%

1.57%

+3.15%

JULH vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison

JULH has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIC's 0.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

JULH vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison

JULH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.27%, more than IBIC's 3.59% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
IBIC
iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF
3.59%4.43%4.65%0.83%
JULH
Innovator Premium Income 20 Barrier ETF - July
5.27%5.31%6.89%3.67%

Frequently Asked Questions


JULH and IBIC have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IBIC has higher volatility (0.16%) compared to JULH (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULH dropped -5.51% vs IBIC's -0.90%.

On 1-year performance, JULH leads with 5.09% vs 4.38% for IBIC. On fees, IBIC 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, JULH has performed better with a 5.09% return vs 4.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IBIC is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for JULH.

JULH has the higher dividend yield at 5.27%, compared with 3.59% for IBIC.

JULH is categorized as Options Trading, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for JULH and 0.10% for IBIC.

IBIC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.94 vs 1.83), 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 JULH and IBIC

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