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

Performance

QCLR vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF (QCLR) 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, QCLR achieves a 0.21% return, which is significantly lower than IBIC's 2.43% return.


QCLR

1D
-1.44%
1M
-0.86%
YTD
0.21%
6M
-0.60%
1Y
9.10%
3Y*
13.86%
5Y*
10Y*

IBIC

1D
0.04%
1M
0.12%
YTD
2.43%
6M
2.57%
1Y
4.42%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QCLR vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
QCLR
Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF
0.21%11.27%20.27%7.47%
IBIC
iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF
2.43%4.96%5.25%2.17%

Correlation

The correlation between QCLR and IBIC is -0.18, 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

-0.18

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

-0.05

The correlation between QCLR and IBIC shifts across timeframes, from -0.18 (1 year) to -0.05 (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

QCLR vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCLR
QCLR Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
QCLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2727
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QCLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
QCLR Omega Ratio Rank: 2727
Omega Ratio Rank
QCLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 2121
Calmar Ratio Rank
QCLR Martin Ratio Rank: 2525
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.

QCLR vs. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF (QCLR) 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.


QCLRIBICDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-4.04

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-7.67

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

2.22

-1.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.89

16.56

-15.67

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.21

58.67

-55.47

QCLR vs. IBIC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCLR Sharpe Ratio is 0.95, which is lower than the IBIC Sharpe Ratio of 4.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCLR 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

QCLR vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCLR drawdown since its inception was -21.77%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCLR and IBIC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QCLRIBICDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.77%

-0.90%

-20.87%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.22%

-0.27%

-9.95%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.58%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.05%

-0.08%

-1.97%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.14%

-0.10%

-6.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.84%

0.08%

+2.76%

Volatility

QCLR vs. IBIC - Volatility Comparison

Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF (QCLR) has a higher volatility of 1.58% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC) at 0.17%. This indicates that QCLR'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


QCLRIBICDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.58%

0.17%

+1.41%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.59%

0.67%

+5.92%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.68%

0.89%

+8.79%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.38%

1.56%

+10.82%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.38%

1.56%

+10.82%

QCLR vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCLR has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIC's 0.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

QCLR vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison

QCLR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.86%, more than IBIC's 3.58% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
IBIC
iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF
3.58%4.43%4.65%0.83%0.00%0.00%
QCLR
Global X NASDAQ 100 Collar 95-110 ETF
14.86%14.89%8.89%0.47%0.27%1.64%

Frequently Asked Questions


QCLR and IBIC have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QCLR has higher volatility (1.58%) compared to IBIC (0.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCLR dropped -21.77% vs IBIC's -0.90%.

On 1-year performance, QCLR leads with 9.10% vs 4.42% for IBIC. On fees, IBIC is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBIC has been the lower-risk option at 0.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, QCLR has performed better with a 9.10% return vs 4.42%. 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 0.60% for QCLR.

QCLR has the higher dividend yield at 14.86%, compared with 3.58% for IBIC.

QCLR is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. QCLR tracks NASDAQ-100 Quarterly Collar 95-110 Index, while IBIC tracks ICE 2026 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QCLR and 0.10% for IBIC.

IBIC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.99 vs 0.95), 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 QCLR 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