AGRW vs. RBIL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AGRW (Allspring LT Large Growth ETF) and RBIL (F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AGRW is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by Allspring, while RBIL is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. AGRW is actively managed, while RBIL is passively managed. Over the past year, AGRW returned 23.16% vs 4.57% for RBIL. At a correlation of -0.20, they often move in opposite directions. AGRW charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for RBIL.

Performance

AGRW vs. RBIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allspring LT Large Growth ETF (AGRW) and F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AGRW achieves a 8.77% return, which is significantly higher than RBIL's 2.70% return.

AGRW

• 1D: -1.69%
• 1M: 7.09%
• YTD: 8.77%
• 6M: 8.21%
• 1Y: 23.16%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RBIL

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: 0.38%
• YTD: 2.70%
• 6M: 2.79%
• 1Y: 4.57%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

AGRW vs. RBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
AGRW Allspring LT Large Growth ETF	8.77%	23.16%
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF	2.70%	2.40%

Correlation

The correlation between AGRW and RBIL is -0.23, 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	-0.23
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 28, 2025	-0.20

Return for Risk

AGRW vs. RBIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

AGRW

AGRW Risk / Return Rank: 37
AGRW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
AGRW Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
AGRW Omega Ratio Rank: 41
AGRW Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
AGRW Martin Ratio Rank: 33

RBIL

RBIL Risk / Return Rank: 98
RBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
RBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
RBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 98
RBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
RBIL 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.

AGRW vs. RBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allspring LT Large Growth ETF (AGRW) and F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL). 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.

	AGRW	RBIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.46	5.01	-3.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.02	7.92	-5.90
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	2.39	-1.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.41	17.00	-15.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.73	70.66	-65.93
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AGRW vs. RBIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AGRW Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is lower than the RBIL Sharpe Ratio of 5.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AGRW and RBIL, 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

	AGRW	RBIL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.46	5.01	-3.55
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.28	4.28	-3.00

Drawdowns

AGRW vs. RBIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AGRW drawdown since its inception was -16.46%, which is greater than RBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AGRW and RBIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	AGRW	RBIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.46%	-0.50%	-15.96%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.46%	-0.27%	-16.19%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.36%	0.00%	-2.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.28%	-0.06%	-3.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.91%	0.07%	+4.84%

Volatility

AGRW vs. RBIL - Volatility Comparison

Allspring LT Large Growth ETF (AGRW) has a higher volatility of 4.34% compared to F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) at 0.30%. This indicates that AGRW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RBIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AGRW	RBIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.34%	0.30%	+4.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.44%	0.79%	+11.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.91%	0.92%	+14.99%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.99%	1.05%	+20.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.99%	1.05%	+20.94%

AGRW vs. RBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

AGRW has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than RBIL's 0.17% expense ratio.

Dividends

AGRW vs. RBIL - Dividend Comparison

AGRW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.12%, less than RBIL's 4.60% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
AGRW Allspring LT Large Growth ETF	0.12%	0.13%
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF	4.60%	3.65%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AGRW and RBIL in my portfolio?

AGRW and RBIL have a correlation of -0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AGRW or RBIL?

AGRW has higher volatility (4.34%) compared to RBIL (0.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AGRW dropped -16.46% vs RBIL's -0.50%.

Which ETF is better, AGRW or RBIL?

On 1-year performance, AGRW leads with 23.16% vs 4.57% for RBIL. On fees, RBIL is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, RBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AGRW or RBIL?

Over the 1-year period, AGRW has performed better with a 23.16% return vs 4.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AGRW or RBIL?

RBIL is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for AGRW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AGRW or RBIL?

RBIL has the higher dividend yield at 4.60%, compared with 0.12% for AGRW.

What is the main difference between AGRW and RBIL?

AGRW is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while RBIL is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Allspring and F/m. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for AGRW and 0.17% for RBIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.01 vs 1.46), 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.