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

Performance

MINV vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF (MINV) 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

In the year-to-date period, MINV achieves a 58.70% return, which is significantly higher than IBIC's 2.37% return.


MINV

1D
-1.11%
1M
14.54%
YTD
58.70%
6M
60.02%
1Y
93.90%
3Y*
34.15%
5Y*
10Y*

IBIC

1D
0.02%
1M
0.27%
YTD
2.37%
6M
2.51%
1Y
4.54%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MINV vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
MINV
Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF
58.70%30.85%17.32%2.61%
IBIC
iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF
2.37%4.96%5.25%2.17%

Correlation

The correlation between MINV and IBIC is -0.22, 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

-0.22

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2023

-0.03

The correlation between MINV and IBIC shifts across timeframes, from -0.22 (1 year) to -0.03 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

MINV vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank

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

MINV
MINV Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
MINV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MINV Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
MINV Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
MINV Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
MINV Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank

IBIC
IBIC Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
IBIC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
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.

MINV vs. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF (MINV) 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.


MINVIBICDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.76

5.05

-1.29

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

4.54

9.12

-4.58

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.62

2.24

-0.62

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

8.68

17.27

-8.59

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

23.03

67.45

-44.42

MINV vs. IBIC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MINV Sharpe Ratio is 3.76, which is comparable to the IBIC Sharpe Ratio of 5.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MINV 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MINVIBICDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.76

5.05

-1.29

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.01

3.49

-2.48

Drawdowns

MINV vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MINV drawdown since its inception was -23.49%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MINV and IBIC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MINVIBICDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-23.49%

-0.90%

-22.59%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.88%

-0.26%

-10.62%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.82%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.89%

-0.13%

-1.76%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.07%

-0.10%

-7.97%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.09%

0.07%

+4.02%

Volatility

MINV vs. IBIC - Volatility Comparison

Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF (MINV) has a higher volatility of 10.63% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC) at 0.33%. This indicates that MINV'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MINVIBICDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

10.63%

0.33%

+10.30%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.20%

0.67%

+20.53%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

25.11%

0.90%

+24.21%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

23.74%

1.58%

+22.16%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.74%

1.58%

+22.16%

MINV vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

MINV vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison

MINV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.95%, less than IBIC's 3.59% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
IBIC
iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF
3.59%4.43%4.65%0.83%
MINV
Matthews Asia Innovators Active ETF
0.95%1.51%0.25%1.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


MINV and IBIC have a correlation of -0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MINV has higher volatility (10.63%) compared to IBIC (0.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MINV dropped -23.49% vs IBIC's -0.90%.

On 1-year performance, MINV leads with 93.90% vs 4.54% for IBIC. On fees, IBIC is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBIC has been the lower-risk option at 0.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, MINV has performed better with a 93.90% return vs 4.54%. 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 MINV.

IBIC has the higher dividend yield at 3.59%, compared with 0.95% for MINV.

MINV is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Matthews and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for MINV and 0.10% for IBIC.

IBIC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.05 vs 3.76), 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 MINV 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