LTPZ vs. IRVH

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

LTPZ (PIMCO 15+ Year US TIPS Index ETF) and IRVH (Global X Interest Rate Volatility & Inflation Hedge ETF) are both Inflation-Protected Bonds funds. LTPZ is passively managed, while IRVH is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, LTPZ returned -1.20%/yr vs 0.07%/yr for IRVH. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LTPZ charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for IRVH.

Performance

LTPZ vs. IRVH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PIMCO 15+ Year US TIPS Index ETF (LTPZ) and Global X Interest Rate Volatility & Inflation Hedge ETF (IRVH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LTPZ achieves a 1.21% return, which is significantly higher than IRVH's -4.21% return.

LTPZ

• 1D: 1.27%
• 1M: 2.04%
• YTD: 1.21%
• 6M: 0.51%
• 1Y: 3.60%
• 3Y*: -1.20%
• 5Y*: -5.38%
• 10Y*: 0.74%

IRVH

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: -1.03%
• YTD: -4.21%
• 6M: -3.71%
• 1Y: -2.96%
• 3Y*: 0.07%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LTPZ vs. IRVH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
LTPZ PIMCO 15+ Year US TIPS Index ETF	1.21%	4.00%	-4.80%	0.96%	-10.31%
IRVH Global X Interest Rate Volatility & Inflation Hedge ETF	-4.21%	7.71%	-5.49%	0.83%	-6.69%

Correlation

The correlation between LTPZ and IRVH is 0.54, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.54
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 6, 2022	0.59

The correlation between LTPZ and IRVH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

LTPZ vs. IRVH — Risk / Return Rank

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

LTPZ

LTPZ Risk / Return Rank: 14
LTPZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
LTPZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
LTPZ Omega Ratio Rank: 13
LTPZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
LTPZ Martin Ratio Rank: 14

IRVH

IRVH Risk / Return Rank: 4
IRVH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
IRVH Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
IRVH Omega Ratio Rank: 4
IRVH Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
IRVH Martin Ratio Rank: 4

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.

LTPZ vs. IRVH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PIMCO 15+ Year US TIPS Index ETF (LTPZ) and Global X Interest Rate Volatility & Inflation Hedge ETF (IRVH). 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.

	LTPZ	IRVH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.39	-0.62	+1.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.62	-0.83	+1.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	0.91	+0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.52	-0.49	+1.00
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.08	-1.12	+2.19

LTPZ vs. IRVH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LTPZ Sharpe Ratio is 0.39, which is higher than the IRVH Sharpe Ratio of -0.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LTPZ and IRVH, 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

LTPZ vs. IRVH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LTPZ drawdown since its inception was -40.99%, which is greater than IRVH's maximum drawdown of -14.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LTPZ and IRVH.

Drawdown Indicators

	LTPZ	IRVH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.99%	-14.98%	-26.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.00%	-6.11%	-0.89%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.98%	-8.03%	-7.95%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-40.99%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-40.99%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-32.21%	-11.14%	-21.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.47%	-9.72%	-2.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.35%	2.66%	+0.69%

Volatility

LTPZ vs. IRVH - Volatility Comparison

PIMCO 15+ Year US TIPS Index ETF (LTPZ) has a higher volatility of 2.72% compared to Global X Interest Rate Volatility & Inflation Hedge ETF (IRVH) at 1.13%. This indicates that LTPZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IRVH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LTPZ	IRVH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.72%	1.13%	+1.59%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.71%	3.36%	+3.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.21%	4.83%	+4.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.87%	8.80%	+7.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.07%	8.80%	+6.27%

LTPZ vs. IRVH - Expense Ratio Comparison

LTPZ has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than IRVH's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

LTPZ vs. IRVH - Dividend Comparison

LTPZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.18%, less than IRVH's 5.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IRVH Global X Interest Rate Volatility & Inflation Hedge ETF	5.61%	4.89%	3.34%	3.69%	2.73%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
LTPZ PIMCO 15+ Year US TIPS Index ETF	5.18%	4.64%	3.71%	3.71%	8.38%	3.56%	1.42%	1.74%	3.05%	2.25%	2.32%	0.71%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LTPZ and IRVH in my portfolio?

LTPZ and IRVH have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LTPZ or IRVH?

LTPZ has higher volatility (2.72%) compared to IRVH (1.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LTPZ dropped -40.99% vs IRVH's -14.98%.

Which ETF is better, LTPZ or IRVH?

On 3-year performance, IRVH leads with 0.07% vs -1.20% for LTPZ. On fees, LTPZ is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, IRVH has been the lower-risk option at 1.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LTPZ or IRVH?

Over the 3-year period, IRVH has performed better with a 0.07% return vs -1.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LTPZ or IRVH?

LTPZ is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for IRVH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LTPZ or IRVH?

IRVH has the higher dividend yield at 5.61%, compared with 5.18% for LTPZ.

What is the main difference between LTPZ and IRVH?

They also come from different issuers: PIMCO and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for LTPZ and 0.50% for IRVH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LTPZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.39 vs -0.62), 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.