TMFG vs. IBIC

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

TMFG (Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF) and IBIC (iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TMFG is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Motley Fool, while IBIC is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2026 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. TMFG is actively managed, while IBIC is passively managed. Over the past year, TMFG returned 4.06% vs 4.38% for IBIC. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. TMFG charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for IBIC.

Performance

TMFG vs. IBIC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF (TMFG) 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, TMFG achieves a 1.05% return, which is significantly lower than IBIC's 2.39% return.

TMFG

• 1D: -1.46%
• 1M: -1.21%
• YTD: 1.05%
• 6M: 0.85%
• 1Y: 4.06%
• 3Y*: 12.08%
• 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)

TMFG vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
TMFG Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF	1.05%	6.75%	15.45%	6.80%
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF	2.39%	4.96%	5.25%	2.17%

Correlation

The correlation between TMFG and IBIC is -0.16, 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	-0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2023	-0.01

The correlation between TMFG and IBIC shifts across timeframes, from -0.16 (1 year) to -0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

TMFG vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank

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

TMFG

TMFG Risk / Return Rank: 12
TMFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
TMFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
TMFG Omega Ratio Rank: 11
TMFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
TMFG Martin Ratio Rank: 14

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.

TMFG vs. IBIC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF (TMFG) 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.

	TMFG	IBIC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.30	4.94	-4.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.52	8.90	-8.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	2.21	-1.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.35	16.41	-16.07
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.17	58.11	-56.94

TMFG vs. IBIC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMFG Sharpe Ratio is 0.30, which is lower than the IBIC Sharpe Ratio of 4.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMFG 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

TMFG vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMFG drawdown since its inception was -33.66%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMFG and IBIC.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMFG	IBIC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.66%	-0.90%	-32.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.81%	-0.27%	-11.54%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.60%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.85%	-0.11%	-2.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.39%	-0.10%	-10.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.48%	0.08%	+3.40%

Volatility

TMFG vs. IBIC - Volatility Comparison

Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF (TMFG) has a higher volatility of 4.08% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC) at 0.16%. This indicates that TMFG'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

	TMFG	IBIC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.08%	0.16%	+3.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.56%	0.67%	+9.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.49%	0.89%	+12.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.59%	1.57%	+17.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.59%	1.57%	+17.02%

TMFG vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

TMFG vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison

TMFG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.27%, less than IBIC's 3.59% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
IBIC iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF	3.59%	4.43%	4.65%	0.83%	0.00%
TMFG Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF	0.27%	0.27%	13.94%	5.42%	0.70%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TMFG and IBIC in my portfolio?

TMFG and IBIC have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TMFG or IBIC?

TMFG has higher volatility (4.08%) compared to IBIC (0.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMFG dropped -33.66% vs IBIC's -0.90%.

Which ETF is better, TMFG or IBIC?

On 1-year performance, IBIC leads with 4.38% vs 4.06% for TMFG. 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, TMFG or IBIC?

Over the 1-year period, IBIC has performed better with a 4.38% return vs 4.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TMFG or IBIC?

IBIC is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for TMFG.

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

IBIC has the higher dividend yield at 3.59%, compared with 0.27% for TMFG.

What is the main difference between TMFG and IBIC?

TMFG is categorized as Global Equities, while IBIC is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Motley Fool and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for TMFG and 0.10% for IBIC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBIC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.94 vs 0.30), 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.