PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QFLR vs. IBID
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QFLR vs. IBID - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) and iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF (IBID). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QFLR achieves a 5.95% return, which is significantly higher than IBID's 1.99% return.


QFLR

1D
1.77%
1M
0.86%
YTD
5.95%
6M
6.01%
1Y
24.68%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

IBID

1D
-0.10%
1M
-0.17%
YTD
1.99%
6M
2.06%
1Y
4.04%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QFLR vs. IBID - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
QFLR
Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF
5.95%17.27%16.30%
IBID
iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF
1.99%5.66%4.90%

Correlation

The correlation between QFLR and IBID 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 Jan 25, 2024

-0.07

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

QFLR vs. IBID — Risk / Return Rank

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

QFLR
QFLR Risk / Return Rank: 6565
Overall Rank
QFLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6363
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QFLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
QFLR Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
QFLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
QFLR Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
Martin Ratio Rank

IBID
IBID Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
IBID Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBID Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBID Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
IBID Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBID Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
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.

QFLR vs. IBID - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) and iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF (IBID). 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.


QFLRIBIDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.42

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.12

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.77

-0.40

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.23

8.54

-5.31

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.94

33.17

-20.23

QFLR vs. IBID - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QFLR Sharpe Ratio is 1.98, which is lower than the IBID Sharpe Ratio of 3.40. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QFLR and IBID, 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

QFLR vs. IBID - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QFLR drawdown since its inception was -13.97%, which is greater than IBID's maximum drawdown of -1.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QFLR and IBID.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QFLRIBIDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.97%

-1.28%

-12.69%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.61%

-0.49%

-7.12%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.36%

-0.49%

-0.87%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.50%

-0.22%

-2.28%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.90%

0.13%

+1.77%

Volatility

QFLR vs. IBID - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) has a higher volatility of 6.16% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF (IBID) at 0.36%. This indicates that QFLR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBID based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QFLRIBIDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.16%

0.36%

+5.80%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.67%

0.86%

+8.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.45%

1.24%

+11.21%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.02%

2.25%

+10.77%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.02%

2.25%

+10.77%

QFLR vs. IBID - Expense Ratio Comparison

QFLR has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than IBID's 0.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

QFLR vs. IBID - Dividend Comparison

QFLR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IBID's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.68%.


PositionTTM202520242023
IBID
iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF
3.68%4.43%4.24%0.81%
QFLR
Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF
0.00%0.02%0.03%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


QFLR and IBID 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.

QFLR has higher volatility (6.16%) compared to IBID (0.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QFLR dropped -13.97% vs IBID's -1.28%.

On 1-year performance, QFLR leads with 24.68% vs 4.04% for IBID. On fees, IBID is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBID has been the lower-risk option at 0.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, QFLR has performed better with a 24.68% return vs 4.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IBID is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for QFLR.

IBID has the higher dividend yield at 3.68%, compared with 0.00% for QFLR.

QFLR is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while IBID is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for QFLR and 0.10% for IBID.

IBID currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.40 vs 1.98), 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 QFLR and IBID

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