ASHS vs. RBIL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ASHS (Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF) and RBIL (F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ASHS is a China Equities fund tracking the CSI 500 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, ASHS returned 57.65% vs 4.57% for RBIL. At a correlation of -0.11, they often move in opposite directions. ASHS charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for RBIL.

Performance

ASHS vs. RBIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) 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, ASHS achieves a 15.10% return, which is significantly higher than RBIL's 2.70% return.

ASHS

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: -0.19%
• YTD: 15.10%
• 6M: 23.90%
• 1Y: 57.65%
• 3Y*: 13.41%
• 5Y*: 3.97%
• 10Y*: 3.27%

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)

ASHS vs. RBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ASHS Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF	15.10%	31.39%
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF	2.70%	2.91%

Correlation

The correlation between ASHS and RBIL is -0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 26, 2025	-0.11

Return for Risk

ASHS vs. RBIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

ASHS

ASHS Risk / Return Rank: 74
ASHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
ASHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
ASHS Omega Ratio Rank: 70
ASHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
ASHS Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

ASHS vs. RBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) 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.

	ASHS	RBIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.57	5.01	-2.44
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.27	7.92	-4.65
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	2.39	-0.96
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.13	17.00	-12.87
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.72	70.66	-56.94
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ASHS vs. RBIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ASHS Sharpe Ratio is 2.57, which is lower than the RBIL Sharpe Ratio of 5.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ASHS 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

	ASHS	RBIL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.57	5.01	-2.44
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.15	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.13	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.19	4.28	-4.09

Drawdowns

ASHS vs. RBIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ASHS drawdown since its inception was -69.90%, which is greater than RBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASHS and RBIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	ASHS	RBIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-69.90%	-0.50%	-69.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.03%	-0.27%	-13.76%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-34.13%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-47.81%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-47.81%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-33.57%	0.00%	-33.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-48.57%	-0.06%	-48.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.21%	0.07%	+4.14%

Volatility

ASHS vs. RBIL - Volatility Comparison

Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF (ASHS) has a higher volatility of 7.33% compared to F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) at 0.30%. This indicates that ASHS'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

	ASHS	RBIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.33%	0.30%	+7.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.00%	0.79%	+16.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.59%	0.92%	+21.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.46%	1.05%	+25.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.57%	1.05%	+24.52%

ASHS vs. RBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

ASHS has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than RBIL's 0.17% expense ratio.

Dividends

ASHS vs. RBIL - Dividend Comparison

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

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ASHS Xtrackers Harvest CSI 500 China A-Shares Small Cap ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.69%	0.65%	1.90%	0.76%	0.43%	0.57%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	8.34%
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF	4.60%	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

Can I hold both ASHS and RBIL in my portfolio?

ASHS and RBIL have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ASHS or RBIL?

ASHS has higher volatility (7.33%) compared to RBIL (0.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASHS dropped -69.90% vs RBIL's -0.50%.

Which ETF is better, ASHS or RBIL?

On 1-year performance, ASHS leads with 57.65% 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, ASHS or RBIL?

Over the 1-year period, ASHS has performed better with a 57.65% return vs 4.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ASHS or RBIL?

RBIL is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ASHS.

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

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

What is the main difference between ASHS and RBIL?

ASHS is categorized as China Equities, while RBIL is Inflation-Protected Bonds. ASHS tracks CSI 500 Index, while RBIL tracks Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. They also come from different issuers: Deutsche Bank and F/m. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ASHS and 0.17% for RBIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.01 vs 2.57), 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.