RDTL vs. IBIC

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

RDTL (GraniteShares 2x Long RDDT Daily ETF) and IBIC (iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RDTL is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares, while IBIC is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2026 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. RDTL is actively managed, while IBIC is passively managed. Over the past year, RDTL returned -17.21% vs 4.38% for IBIC. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. RDTL charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for IBIC.

Performance

RDTL vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long RDDT Daily ETF (RDTL) and iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RDTL achieves a -59.26% return, which is significantly lower than IBIC's 2.39% return.

RDTL

• 1D: -4.71%
• 1M: 35.48%
• YTD: -59.26%
• 6M: -60.59%
• 1Y: -17.21%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IBIC

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: 0.08%
• YTD: 2.39%
• 6M: 2.49%
• 1Y: 4.38%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RDTL vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RDTL GraniteShares 2x Long RDDT Daily ETF	-59.26%	104.22%
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF	2.39%	2.98%

Correlation

The correlation between RDTL and IBIC is -0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.07
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 25, 2025	-0.05

Return for Risk

RDTL vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank

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

RDTL

RDTL Risk / Return Rank: 10
RDTL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
RDTL Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
RDTL Omega Ratio Rank: 14
RDTL Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
RDTL Martin Ratio Rank: 7

IBIC

IBIC Risk / Return Rank: 98
IBIC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
IBIC Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
IBIC Omega Ratio Rank: 98
IBIC Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
IBIC Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

RDTL vs. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long RDDT Daily ETF (RDTL) 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.

	RDTL	IBIC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.13	4.94	-5.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.76	8.90	-8.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	2.21	-1.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.20	16.41	-16.62
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.31	58.11	-58.42

RDTL vs. IBIC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RDTL Sharpe Ratio is -0.13, which is lower than the IBIC Sharpe Ratio of 4.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RDTL 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.

Drawdowns

RDTL vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RDTL drawdown since its inception was -85.21%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RDTL and IBIC.

Drawdown Indicators

	RDTL	IBIC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-85.21%	-0.90%	-84.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-85.21%	-0.27%	-84.94%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-75.20%	-0.11%	-75.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-44.82%	-0.10%	-44.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	55.32%	0.08%	+55.24%

Volatility

RDTL vs. IBIC - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long RDDT Daily ETF (RDTL) has a higher volatility of 48.63% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC) at 0.16%. This indicates that RDTL'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.

Volatility by Period

	RDTL	IBIC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	48.63%	0.16%	+48.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	95.60%	0.67%	+94.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	132.04%	0.89%	+131.15%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	143.17%	1.57%	+141.60%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	143.17%	1.57%	+141.60%

RDTL vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison

RDTL has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIC's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

RDTL vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison

RDTL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IBIC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.59%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF	3.59%	4.43%	4.65%	0.83%
RDTL GraniteShares 2x Long RDDT Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RDTL and IBIC in my portfolio?

RDTL and IBIC have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RDTL or IBIC?

RDTL has higher volatility (48.63%) compared to IBIC (0.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RDTL dropped -85.21% vs IBIC's -0.90%.

Which ETF is better, RDTL or IBIC?

On 1-year performance, IBIC leads with 4.38% vs -17.21% for RDTL. On fees, IBIC is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBIC has been the lower-risk option at 0.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RDTL or IBIC?

Over the 1-year period, IBIC has performed better with a 4.38% return vs -17.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RDTL or IBIC?

IBIC is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for RDTL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RDTL or IBIC?

IBIC has the higher dividend yield at 3.59%, compared with 0.00% for RDTL.

What is the main difference between RDTL and IBIC?

RDTL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for RDTL and 0.10% for IBIC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBIC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.94 vs -0.13), 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.