VRTL vs. IBIF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

VRTL (GraniteShares 2x Long VRT Daily ETF) and IBIF (iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - VRTL is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by GraniteShares, while IBIF is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2029 Maturity US Inflation-Linked Treasury Index. VRTL is actively managed, while IBIF is passively managed. Over the past year, VRTL returned 442.54% vs 4.97% for IBIF. At a correlation of -0.14, they often move in opposite directions. VRTL charges 1.50%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for IBIF.

Performance

VRTL vs. IBIF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long VRT Daily ETF (VRTL) and iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF (IBIF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VRTL achieves a 230.54% return, which is significantly higher than IBIF's 1.91% return.

VRTL

• 1D: -1.32%
• 1M: -3.10%
• YTD: 230.54%
• 6M: 160.92%
• 1Y: 442.54%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IBIF

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: -0.11%
• YTD: 1.91%
• 6M: 1.78%
• 1Y: 4.97%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

VRTL vs. IBIF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
VRTL GraniteShares 2x Long VRT Daily ETF	230.54%	108.44%
IBIF iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF	1.91%	3.97%

Correlation

The correlation between VRTL and IBIF is -0.12, 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	-0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 26, 2025	-0.14

Return for Risk

VRTL vs. IBIF — Risk / Return Rank

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

VRTL

VRTL Risk / Return Rank: 87
VRTL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
VRTL Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
VRTL Omega Ratio Rank: 73
VRTL Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
VRTL Martin Ratio Rank: 93

IBIF

IBIF Risk / Return Rank: 84
IBIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
IBIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
IBIF Omega Ratio Rank: 82
IBIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
IBIF Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

VRTL vs. IBIF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long VRT Daily ETF (VRTL) and iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF (IBIF). 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.

	VRTL	IBIF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.91	2.46	+1.44
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.49	4.17	-0.69
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.49	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.40	5.25	+4.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	24.03	17.34	+6.69
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

VRTL vs. IBIF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VRTL Sharpe Ratio is 3.91, which is higher than the IBIF Sharpe Ratio of 2.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VRTL and IBIF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	VRTL	IBIF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.91	2.46	+1.44
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	3.29	1.72	+1.57

Drawdowns

VRTL vs. IBIF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VRTL drawdown since its inception was -60.58%, which is greater than IBIF's maximum drawdown of -2.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VRTL and IBIF.

Drawdown Indicators

	VRTL	IBIF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.58%	-2.50%	-58.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-47.45%	-0.95%	-46.50%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-24.11%	-0.11%	-24.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.16%	-0.55%	-14.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	18.53%	0.29%	+18.24%

Volatility

VRTL vs. IBIF - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long VRT Daily ETF (VRTL) has a higher volatility of 33.79% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF (IBIF) at 0.46%. This indicates that VRTL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBIF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	VRTL	IBIF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	33.79%	0.46%	+33.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	87.48%	1.33%	+86.15%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	114.32%	2.03%	+112.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	124.39%	3.55%	+120.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	124.39%	3.55%	+120.84%

VRTL vs. IBIF - Expense Ratio Comparison

VRTL has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIF's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

VRTL vs. IBIF - Dividend Comparison

VRTL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IBIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.74%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
IBIF iShares iBonds Oct 2029 Term TIPS ETF	3.74%	4.51%	4.05%	0.96%
VRTL GraniteShares 2x Long VRT Daily ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both VRTL and IBIF in my portfolio?

VRTL and IBIF have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, VRTL or IBIF?

VRTL has higher volatility (33.79%) compared to IBIF (0.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VRTL dropped -60.58% vs IBIF's -2.50%.

Which ETF is better, VRTL or IBIF?

On 1-year performance, VRTL leads with 442.54% vs 4.97% for IBIF. On fees, IBIF is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBIF has been the lower-risk option at 0.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, VRTL or IBIF?

Over the 1-year period, VRTL has performed better with a 442.54% return vs 4.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, VRTL or IBIF?

IBIF is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for VRTL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, VRTL or IBIF?

IBIF has the higher dividend yield at 3.74%, compared with 0.00% for VRTL.

What is the main difference between VRTL and IBIF?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

VRTL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.91 vs 2.46), 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.