AIA vs. RBIL
AIA (iShares Asia 50 ETF) and RBIL (F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AIA is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the S&P Asia 50 Index, while RBIL is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, AIA returned 80.75% vs 4.07% for RBIL. At a correlation of -0.17, they often move in opposite directions. AIA charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for RBIL.
Performance
AIA vs. RBIL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AIA achieves a 43.04% return, which is significantly higher than RBIL's 2.32% return.
AIA
- 1D
- -7.46%
- 1M
- 3.93%
- YTD
- 43.04%
- 6M
- 46.22%
- 1Y
- 80.75%
- 3Y*
- 36.18%
- 5Y*
- 11.29%
- 10Y*
- 14.96%
RBIL
- 1D
- 0.01%
- 1M
- -0.19%
- YTD
- 2.32%
- 6M
- 2.37%
- 1Y
- 4.07%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AIA vs. RBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF | 43.04% | 34.92% |
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF | 2.32% | 2.85% |
Correlation
The correlation between AIA and RBIL is -0.13, 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 | -0.13 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2025 | -0.17 |
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
AIA vs. RBIL — Risk / Return Rank
AIA
RBIL
AIA vs. RBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) 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.
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.
| AIA | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.60 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.49 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | 2.13 | -0.65 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.74 | 7.82 | -2.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.64 | 42.95 | -23.31 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AIA vs. RBIL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AIA drawdown since its inception was -60.89%, which is greater than RBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AIA and RBIL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AIA | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -60.89% | -0.52% | -60.37% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.15% | -0.52% | -13.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.64% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -50.11% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -54.64% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.46% | -0.50% | -6.96% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.64% | -0.07% | -16.57% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.13% | 0.10% | +4.03% |
Volatility
AIA vs. RBIL - Volatility Comparison
iShares Asia 50 ETF (AIA) has a higher volatility of 16.92% compared to F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) at 0.36%. This indicates that AIA'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AIA | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 16.92% | 0.36% | +16.56% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 26.32% | 0.85% | +25.47% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 29.51% | 0.95% | +28.56% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.34% | 1.07% | +25.27% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.93% | 1.07% | +22.86% |
AIA vs. RBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison
AIA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than RBIL's 0.17% expense ratio.
Dividends
AIA vs. RBIL - Dividend Comparison
AIA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.54%, less than RBIL's 4.38% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AIA iShares Asia 50 ETF | 1.54% | 2.50% | 2.78% | 2.07% | 2.59% | 1.54% | 1.11% | 2.24% | 2.49% | 1.45% | 2.29% | 2.88% |
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF | 4.38% | 3.65% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AIA and RBIL have a correlation of -0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AIA has higher volatility (16.92%) compared to RBIL (0.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AIA dropped -60.89% vs RBIL's -0.52%.
On 1-year performance, AIA leads with 80.75% vs 4.07% for RBIL. On fees, RBIL is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, RBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, AIA has performed better with a 80.75% return vs 4.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RBIL is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for AIA.
RBIL has the higher dividend yield at 4.38%, compared with 1.54% for AIA.
AIA is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while RBIL is Inflation-Protected Bonds. AIA tracks S&P Asia 50 Index, while RBIL tracks Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and F/m. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for AIA and 0.17% for RBIL.
RBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.35 vs 2.75), 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 AIA and RBIL
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