RFFC vs. IBID
RFFC (ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF) and IBID (iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RFFC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by SS&C, while IBID is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2027 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. RFFC is actively managed, while IBID is passively managed. Over the past year, RFFC returned 27.11% vs 3.92% for IBID. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. RFFC charges 0.48%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for IBID.
Performance
RFFC vs. IBID - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RFFC achieves a 10.13% return, which is significantly higher than IBID's 1.94% return.
RFFC
- 1D
- -0.84%
- 1M
- 0.61%
- YTD
- 10.13%
- 6M
- 9.43%
- 1Y
- 27.11%
- 3Y*
- 20.79%
- 5Y*
- 11.91%
- 10Y*
- 12.66%
IBID
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- -0.25%
- YTD
- 1.94%
- 6M
- 2.03%
- 1Y
- 3.92%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RFFC vs. IBID - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
RFFC ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF | 10.13% | 16.83% | 23.51% | 7.00% |
IBID iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF | 1.94% | 5.66% | 4.71% | 2.61% |
Correlation
The correlation between RFFC and IBID is -0.17, 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 | -0.17 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2023 | -0.01 |
The correlation between RFFC and IBID shifts across timeframes, from -0.17 (1 year) to -0.01 (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
RFFC vs. IBID — Risk / Return Rank
RFFC
IBID
RFFC vs. IBID - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) 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.
| RFFC | IBID | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.00 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.32 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 1.72 | -0.33 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.94 | 7.20 | -4.26 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.37 | 29.14 | -15.77 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RFFC vs. IBID - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RFFC drawdown since its inception was -36.26%, which is greater than IBID's maximum drawdown of -1.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFFC and IBID.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RFFC | IBID | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.26% | -1.28% | -34.98% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.25% | -0.55% | -8.70% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.45% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.29% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.26% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.55% | -0.55% | -1.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.00% | -0.22% | -4.78% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.03% | 0.13% | +1.90% |
Volatility
RFFC vs. IBID - Volatility Comparison
ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC) has a higher volatility of 4.25% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF (IBID) at 0.35%. This indicates that RFFC'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
| RFFC | IBID | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.25% | 0.35% | +3.90% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.88% | 0.86% | +9.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.45% | 1.23% | +11.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.33% | 2.24% | +14.09% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.01% | 2.24% | +15.77% |
RFFC vs. IBID - Expense Ratio Comparison
RFFC has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is higher than IBID's 0.10% expense ratio.
Dividends
RFFC vs. IBID - Dividend Comparison
RFFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.64%, less than IBID's 3.68% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBID iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF | 3.68% | 4.43% | 4.24% | 0.81% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RFFC ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF | 0.64% | 0.78% | 1.05% | 1.35% | 1.41% | 0.71% | 1.79% | 1.34% | 1.36% | 0.93% | 0.66% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RFFC and IBID have a correlation of -0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RFFC has higher volatility (4.25%) compared to IBID (0.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFFC dropped -36.26% vs IBID's -1.28%.
On 1-year performance, RFFC leads with 27.11% vs 3.92% for IBID. On fees, IBID is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBID has been the lower-risk option at 0.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, RFFC has performed better with a 27.11% return vs 3.92%. 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 0.48% for RFFC.
IBID has the higher dividend yield at 3.68%, compared with 0.64% for RFFC.
RFFC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while IBID is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: SS&C and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for RFFC and 0.10% for IBID.
IBID currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.19 vs 2.19), 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.
Find the right allocation for RFFC 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