BFAP vs. ILS

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

BFAP (FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April) and ILS (Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BFAP is a Cryptocurrency fund actively managed by First Trust, while ILS is a Nontraditional Bonds fund actively managed by Brookmont. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BFAP returned -28.57% vs 7.84% for ILS. At a correlation of -0.12, they often move in opposite directions. BFAP charges 0.90%/yr vs 1.58%/yr for ILS.

Performance

BFAP vs. ILS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP) and Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BFAP achieves a -20.77% return, which is significantly lower than ILS's 3.05% return.

BFAP

• 1D: 0.30%
• 1M: -0.75%
• 6M: -27.01%
• YTD: -20.77%
• 1Y: -28.57%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ILS

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: 1.07%
• 6M: 3.08%
• YTD: 3.05%
• 1Y: 7.84%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BFAP vs. ILS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BFAP FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April	-20.77%	8.90%
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	3.05%	5.19%

Correlation

The correlation between BFAP and ILS is -0.11, 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	-0.11
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2025	-0.12

Return for Risk

BFAP vs. ILS — Risk / Return Rank

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

BFAP

BFAP Risk / Return Rank: 1
BFAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
BFAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
BFAP Omega Ratio Rank: 1
BFAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
BFAP Martin Ratio Rank: 1

ILS

ILS Risk / Return Rank: 97
ILS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
ILS Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
ILS Omega Ratio Rank: 97
ILS Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
ILS 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.

BFAP vs. ILS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP) and Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS). 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.

	BFAP	ILS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.33	3.16	-4.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.88	5.27	-7.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.78	1.73	-0.95
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.84	14.23	-15.07
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.43	53.21	-54.63

BFAP vs. ILS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BFAP Sharpe Ratio is -1.33, which is lower than the ILS Sharpe Ratio of 3.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BFAP and ILS, 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

BFAP vs. ILS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BFAP drawdown since its inception was -34.15%, which is greater than ILS's maximum drawdown of -2.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFAP and ILS.

Drawdown Indicators

	BFAP	ILS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.15%	-2.46%	-31.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-34.15%	-0.55%	-33.60%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-31.14%	0.00%	-31.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.62%	-0.52%	-12.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	20.04%	0.15%	+19.89%

Volatility

BFAP vs. ILS - Volatility Comparison

FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP) has a higher volatility of 4.90% compared to Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) at 0.47%. This indicates that BFAP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ILS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BFAP	ILS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.90%	0.47%	+4.43%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.55%	1.47%	+15.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.52%	2.49%	+19.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.28%	3.71%	+16.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.28%	3.71%	+16.57%

BFAP vs. ILS - Expense Ratio Comparison

BFAP has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is lower than ILS's 1.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

BFAP vs. ILS - Dividend Comparison

BFAP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 23.94%, more than ILS's 8.17% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
BFAP FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April	23.94%	18.97%
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	8.17%	6.06%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BFAP and ILS in my portfolio?

BFAP and ILS have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BFAP or ILS?

BFAP has higher volatility (4.90%) compared to ILS (0.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFAP dropped -34.15% vs ILS's -2.46%.

Which ETF is better, BFAP or ILS?

On 1-year performance, ILS leads with 7.84% vs -28.57% for BFAP. On fees, BFAP is cheaper at 0.90% per year. On volatility, ILS has been the lower-risk option at 0.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BFAP or ILS?

Over the 1-year period, ILS has performed better with a 7.84% return vs -28.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BFAP or ILS?

BFAP is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 1.58% for ILS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BFAP or ILS?

BFAP has the higher dividend yield at 23.94%, compared with 8.17% for ILS.

What is the main difference between BFAP and ILS?

BFAP is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while ILS is Nontraditional Bonds. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Brookmont. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for BFAP and 1.58% for ILS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ILS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.16 vs -1.33), 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.