TIPA vs. SCHP
TIPA (Northern Trust 2030 Inflation-Linked Distributing Ladder ETF) and SCHP (Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF) are both Inflation-Protected Bonds funds. TIPA is actively managed, while SCHP is passively managed. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TIPA charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for SCHP.
Performance
TIPA vs. SCHP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TIPA achieves a 1.78% return, which is significantly higher than SCHP's 1.31% return.
TIPA
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- -0.36%
- 6M
- 1.77%
- YTD
- 1.78%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SCHP
- 1D
- 0.19%
- 1M
- -0.30%
- 6M
- 1.35%
- YTD
- 1.31%
- 1Y
- 3.64%
- 3Y*
- 3.99%
- 5Y*
- 0.89%
- 10Y*
- 2.43%
TIPA vs. SCHP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
TIPA Northern Trust 2030 Inflation-Linked Distributing Ladder ETF | 1.78% | 0.52% |
SCHP Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF | 1.31% | 1.50% |
Correlation
The correlation between TIPA and SCHP is 0.76, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 19, 2025 | 0.76 |
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
TIPA vs. SCHP — Risk / Return Rank
TIPA
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
SCHP
TIPA vs. SCHP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Northern Trust 2030 Inflation-Linked Distributing Ladder ETF (TIPA) and Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF (SCHP). 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.
| TIPA | SCHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.18 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.81 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 5.34 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
TIPA vs. SCHP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TIPA drawdown since its inception was -0.76%, smaller than the maximum SCHP drawdown of -14.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TIPA and SCHP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TIPA | SCHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.76% | -14.26% | +13.50% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -1.93% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -4.48% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -14.26% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -14.26% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.43% | -0.54% | +0.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.22% | -3.92% | +3.70% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.65% | — |
Volatility
TIPA vs. SCHP - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TIPA | SCHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 1.28% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 2.45% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.63% | 3.37% | -1.74% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.63% | 6.12% | -4.49% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.63% | 5.59% | -3.96% |
TIPA vs. SCHP - Expense Ratio Comparison
TIPA has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHP's 0.03% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
TIPA vs. SCHP - Dividend Comparison
TIPA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.29%, less than SCHP's 4.47% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SCHP Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF | 4.47% | 4.06% | 2.99% | 3.02% | 7.19% | 4.39% | 1.11% | 2.02% | 2.26% | 1.90% | 1.38% | 0.28% |
TIPA Northern Trust 2030 Inflation-Linked Distributing Ladder ETF | 3.29% | 0.84% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TIPA and SCHP have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, SCHP is cheaper at 0.03% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SCHP is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.10% for TIPA.
SCHP has the higher dividend yield at 4.47%, compared with 3.29% for TIPA.
They also come from different issuers: Northern Trust and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for TIPA and 0.03% for SCHP.
Find the right allocation for TIPA and SCHP
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