BFAP vs. ILS
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 -24.44% vs 7.67% for ILS. At a correlation of -0.11, they often move in opposite directions. BFAP charges 0.90%/yr vs 1.58%/yr for ILS.
Performance
BFAP vs. ILS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BFAP achieves a -20.89% return, which is significantly lower than ILS's 1.81% return.
BFAP
- 1D
- -1.05%
- 1M
- -7.01%
- YTD
- -20.89%
- 6M
- -23.66%
- 1Y
- -24.44%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ILS
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- 0.45%
- YTD
- 1.81%
- 6M
- 2.12%
- 1Y
- 7.67%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BFAP vs. ILS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BFAP FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April | -20.89% | 8.90% |
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF | 1.81% | 5.43% |
Correlation
The correlation between BFAP and ILS is -0.09, 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 | -0.09 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 7, 2025 | -0.11 |
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
BFAP vs. ILS — Risk / Return Rank
BFAP
ILS
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.
| BFAP | ILS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.94 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -6.14 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.81 | 1.62 | -0.81 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.79 | 13.93 | -14.71 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.45 | 46.57 | -48.02 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| BFAP | ILS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -1.15 | 2.79 | -3.94 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.59 | 1.90 | -2.49 |
Drawdowns
BFAP vs. ILS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BFAP drawdown since its inception was -31.25%, which is greater than ILS's maximum drawdown of -1.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFAP and ILS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BFAP | ILS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.25% | -1.56% | -29.69% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -31.25% | -0.55% | -30.70% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -31.25% | 0.00% | -31.25% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.77% | -0.25% | -10.52% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.89% | 0.17% | +16.72% |
Volatility
BFAP vs. ILS - Volatility Comparison
FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP) has a higher volatility of 3.59% compared to Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) at 0.88%. 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BFAP | ILS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.59% | 0.88% | +2.71% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.66% | 1.69% | +15.97% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.26% | 2.77% | +18.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.57% | 3.38% | +17.19% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.57% | 3.38% | +17.19% |
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 23.98%, more than ILS's 8.09% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
BFAP FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April | 23.98% | 18.97% |
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF | 8.09% | 6.06% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BFAP and ILS have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BFAP has higher volatility (3.59%) compared to ILS (0.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFAP dropped -31.25% vs ILS's -1.56%.
On 1-year performance, ILS leads with 7.67% vs -24.44% for BFAP. On fees, BFAP is cheaper at 0.90% per year. On volatility, ILS has been the lower-risk option at 0.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, ILS has performed better with a 7.67% return vs -24.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BFAP is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 1.58% for ILS.
BFAP has the higher dividend yield at 23.98%, compared with 8.09% for 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.
ILS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.79 vs -1.15), 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 BFAP and ILS
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