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

Performance

RAA vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF (RAA) 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, RAA achieves a 10.92% return, which is significantly higher than IBIC's 2.34% return.


RAA

1D
-0.11%
1M
2.74%
YTD
10.92%
6M
10.91%
1Y
24.20%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

IBIC

1D
-0.03%
1M
0.28%
YTD
2.34%
6M
2.50%
1Y
4.49%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RAA vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between RAA and IBIC 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 Feb 27, 2025

-0.19

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

RAA vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank

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

RAA
RAA Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
RAA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RAA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
RAA Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
RAA Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
RAA Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

IBIC
IBIC Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
IBIC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBIC Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
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.

RAA vs. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF (RAA) 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.


RAAIBICDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.43

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-5.48

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

2.22

-0.75

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.11

17.09

-12.97

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.57

66.52

-49.95

RAA vs. IBIC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RAA Sharpe Ratio is 2.56, which is lower than the IBIC Sharpe Ratio of 4.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RAA 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


RAAIBICDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.56

4.99

-2.43

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.48

3.48

-2.00

Drawdowns

RAA vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RAA drawdown since its inception was -11.80%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RAA and IBIC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RAAIBICDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.80%

-0.90%

-10.90%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.91%

-0.26%

-5.65%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.51%

-0.16%

-0.35%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.41%

-0.10%

-1.31%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.46%

0.07%

+1.39%

Volatility

RAA vs. IBIC - Volatility Comparison

SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF (RAA) has a higher volatility of 2.85% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC) at 0.32%. This indicates that RAA'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


RAAIBICDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.85%

0.32%

+2.53%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.44%

0.67%

+6.77%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.48%

0.90%

+8.58%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.69%

1.58%

+11.11%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.69%

1.58%

+11.11%

RAA vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison

RAA has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIC's 0.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

RAA vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison

RAA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.11%, less than IBIC's 3.59% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
IBIC
iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF
3.59%4.43%4.65%0.83%
RAA
SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF
2.11%2.14%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


RAA and IBIC 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.

RAA has higher volatility (2.85%) compared to IBIC (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RAA dropped -11.80% vs IBIC's -0.90%.

On 1-year performance, RAA leads with 24.20% vs 4.49% for IBIC. On fees, IBIC is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBIC has been the lower-risk option at 0.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, RAA has performed better with a 24.20% return vs 4.49%. 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 0.85% for RAA.

IBIC has the higher dividend yield at 3.59%, compared with 2.11% for RAA.

RAA is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: SMI Advisory Services and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for RAA and 0.10% for IBIC.

IBIC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.99 vs 2.56), 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 RAA 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