APCB vs. BNDS

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

APCB (ActivePassive Core Bond ETF) and BNDS (Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF) are both Intermediate Core-Plus Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, APCB returned 1.90% vs 9.23% for BNDS. Their 0.42 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. APCB charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.81%/yr for BNDS.

Performance

APCB vs. BNDS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ActivePassive Core Bond ETF (APCB) and Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF (BNDS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, APCB achieves a -0.51% return, which is significantly lower than BNDS's 4.11% return.

APCB

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: -1.30%
• 6M: -0.78%
• YTD: -0.51%
• 1Y: 1.90%
• 3Y*: 3.88%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 2.85%

BNDS

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: -0.77%
• 6M: 1.77%
• YTD: 4.11%
• 1Y: 9.23%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 8.21%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
APCB ActivePassive Core Bond ETF	$1.44M	$5.18M	$2.86M
BNDS Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF	$2.24M	$2.01M	$1.56M

APCB vs. BNDS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
APCB ActivePassive Core Bond ETF	-0.51%	7.93%
BNDS Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF	4.11%	8.45%

Correlation

The correlation between APCB and BNDS is 0.39, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 15, 2025	0.42

Return for Risk

APCB vs. BNDS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

APCB

APCB Risk / Return Rank: 30
APCB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
APCB Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
APCB Omega Ratio Rank: 29
APCB Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
APCB Martin Ratio Rank: 30

BNDS

BNDS Risk / Return Rank: 88
BNDS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
BNDS Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
BNDS Omega Ratio Rank: 94
BNDS Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
BNDS Martin Ratio Rank: 85

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

APCB vs. BNDS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ActivePassive Core Bond ETF (APCB) and Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF (BNDS). 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.

	APCB	BNDS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.78	2.55	-1.77
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.13	3.68	-2.55
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.50	-0.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.02	2.66	-1.64
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.58	11.88	-9.30

APCB vs. BNDS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current APCB Sharpe Ratio is 0.78, which is lower than the BNDS Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of APCB and BNDS, 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

APCB vs. BNDS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum APCB drawdown since its inception was -6.42%, smaller than the maximum BNDS drawdown of -6.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for APCB and BNDS.

Drawdown Indicators

	APCB	BNDS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.42%	-6.96%	+0.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.58%	-3.45%	+0.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-4.41%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.20%	-1.08%	-1.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.50%	-0.77%	-0.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.02%	0.77%	+0.25%

Volatility

APCB vs. BNDS - Volatility Comparison

ActivePassive Core Bond ETF (APCB) has a higher volatility of 0.93% compared to Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF (BNDS) at 0.88%. This indicates that APCB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BNDS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	APCB	BNDS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.93%	0.88%	+0.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.63%	2.81%	-0.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.37%	3.59%	-0.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.78%	5.09%	-0.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.78%	5.09%	-0.31%

APCB vs. BNDS - Expense Ratio Comparison

APCB has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is lower than BNDS's 0.81% expense ratio.

Dividends

APCB vs. BNDS - Dividend Comparison

APCB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.41%, less than BNDS's 8.11% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
APCB ActivePassive Core Bond ETF	4.05%	4.35%	4.74%	2.22%
BNDS Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF	8.11%	7.98%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both APCB and BNDS in my portfolio?

APCB and BNDS have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, APCB or BNDS?

APCB has higher volatility (0.93%) compared to BNDS (0.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, APCB dropped -6.42% vs BNDS's -6.96%.

Which ETF is better, APCB or BNDS?

On 1-year performance, BNDS leads with 9.23% vs 1.90% for APCB. On fees, APCB is cheaper at 0.36% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, APCB or BNDS?

Over the 1-year period, BNDS has performed better with a 9.23% return vs 1.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, APCB or BNDS?

APCB is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.81% for BNDS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, APCB or BNDS?

BNDS has the higher dividend yield at 8.11%, compared with 4.05% for APCB.

What is the main difference between APCB and BNDS?

They also come from different issuers: ActivePassive and InfraCap. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for APCB and 0.81% for BNDS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BNDS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs 0.78), 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.