PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AOTG vs. RBIL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AOTG vs. RBIL - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AOTG achieves a 16.15% return, which is significantly higher than RBIL's 2.67% return.


AOTG

1D
-0.51%
1M
12.54%
YTD
16.15%
6M
14.95%
1Y
39.35%
3Y*
28.98%
5Y*
10Y*

RBIL

1D
-0.03%
1M
0.34%
YTD
2.67%
6M
2.74%
1Y
4.60%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AOTG vs. RBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between AOTG and RBIL is -0.21, 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

-0.21

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 26, 2025

-0.21

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

AOTG vs. RBIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

AOTG
AOTG Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
AOTG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AOTG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4545
Sortino Ratio Rank
AOTG Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
AOTG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
AOTG Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
Martin Ratio Rank

RBIL
RBIL Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
RBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
RBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
RBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
RBIL Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

AOTG vs. RBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AOT Growth and Innovation ETF (AOTG) 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.


AOTGRBILDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-3.40

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-5.80

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

2.41

-1.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.73

17.11

-15.38

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.98

71.11

-66.13

AOTG vs. RBIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AOTG Sharpe Ratio is 1.65, which is lower than the RBIL Sharpe Ratio of 5.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AOTG 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


AOTGRBILDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.65

5.06

-3.40

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.96

4.24

-3.28

Drawdowns

AOTG vs. RBIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AOTG drawdown since its inception was -31.63%, which is greater than RBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AOTG and RBIL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AOTGRBILDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.63%

-0.50%

-31.13%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-22.85%

-0.27%

-22.58%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.41%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.81%

-0.03%

-2.78%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.89%

-0.06%

-7.83%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

7.93%

0.06%

+7.87%

Volatility

AOTG vs. RBIL - Volatility Comparison

AOT Growth and Innovation ETF (AOTG) has a higher volatility of 7.56% compared to F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) at 0.30%. This indicates that AOTG'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


AOTGRBILDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.56%

0.30%

+7.26%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.77%

0.79%

+17.98%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

23.89%

0.92%

+22.97%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

29.26%

1.05%

+28.21%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

29.26%

1.05%

+28.21%

AOTG vs. RBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

AOTG has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than RBIL's 0.17% expense ratio.


Dividends

AOTG vs. RBIL - Dividend Comparison

AOTG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RBIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.60%.


Frequently Asked Questions


AOTG and RBIL have a correlation of -0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

AOTG has higher volatility (7.56%) compared to RBIL (0.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AOTG dropped -31.63% vs RBIL's -0.50%.

On 1-year performance, AOTG leads with 39.35% vs 4.60% 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.

Over the 1-year period, AOTG has performed better with a 39.35% return vs 4.60%. 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 0.75% for AOTG.

RBIL has the higher dividend yield at 4.60%, compared with 0.00% for AOTG.

AOTG is categorized as Technology Equities, while RBIL is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: AOT and F/m. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for AOTG and 0.17% for RBIL.

RBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.06 vs 1.65), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AOTG 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