BIL vs. TAIL

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

BIL (SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF) and TAIL (Cambria Tail Risk ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BIL is a Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg 1-3 Month U.S. Treasury Bill Index, while TAIL is a Volatility Hedged Equity fund actively managed by Cambria. BIL is passively managed, while TAIL is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, BIL returned 3.43%/yr vs -8.40%/yr for TAIL. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BIL charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for TAIL.

Performance

BIL vs. TAIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF (BIL) and Cambria Tail Risk ETF (TAIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BIL achieves a 1.60% return, which is significantly higher than TAIL's -5.78% return.

BIL

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: 0.29%
• YTD: 1.60%
• 6M: 1.76%
• 1Y: 3.85%
• 3Y*: 4.63%
• 5Y*: 3.43%
• 10Y*: 2.20%

TAIL

• 1D: -0.60%
• 1M: -0.32%
• YTD: -5.78%
• 6M: -6.25%
• 1Y: -8.88%
• 3Y*: -4.93%
• 5Y*: -8.40%
• 10Y*: —

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

BIL vs. TAIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BIL SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF	1.60%	4.15%	5.19%	4.94%	1.40%	-0.10%	0.40%	2.03%	1.74%	0.48%
TAIL Cambria Tail Risk ETF	-5.78%	5.48%	-9.62%	-13.29%	-13.13%	-12.81%	6.91%	-14.27%	2.85%	-7.55%

Correlation

The correlation between BIL and TAIL is -0.01, 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	-0.01
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.01
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2017	0.01

Return for Risk

BIL vs. TAIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

BIL

BIL Risk / Return Rank: 100
BIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
BIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
BIL Omega Ratio Rank: 100
BIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
BIL Martin Ratio Rank: 100

TAIL

TAIL Risk / Return Rank: 2
TAIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
TAIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
TAIL Omega Ratio Rank: 2
TAIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
TAIL Martin Ratio Rank: 0

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.

BIL vs. TAIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF (BIL) and Cambria Tail Risk ETF (TAIL). 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.

	BIL	TAIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	19.63	-1.00	+20.63
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	175.17	-1.43	+176.60
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	88.41	0.84	+87.57
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	357.44	-0.78	+358.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2,834.34	-1.82	+2,836.15

BIL vs. TAIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BIL Sharpe Ratio is 19.63, which is higher than the TAIL Sharpe Ratio of -1.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BIL and TAIL, 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

BIL vs. TAIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BIL drawdown since its inception was -0.78%, smaller than the maximum TAIL drawdown of -52.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BIL and TAIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	BIL	TAIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.78%	-52.36%	+51.58%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.01%	-10.99%	+10.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.01%	-20.69%	+20.68%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-0.09%	-38.44%	+38.35%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-0.21%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-51.35%	+51.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.26%	-29.18%	+28.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.00%	4.68%	-4.68%

Volatility

BIL vs. TAIL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF (BIL) is 0.06%, while Cambria Tail Risk ETF (TAIL) has a volatility of 1.51%. This indicates that BIL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TAIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BIL	TAIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.06%	1.51%	-1.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.14%	6.56%	-6.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.20%	8.51%	-8.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.26%	14.91%	-14.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.26%	14.92%	-14.66%

BIL vs. TAIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

BIL has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than TAIL's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

BIL vs. TAIL - Dividend Comparison

BIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.86%, more than TAIL's 3.48% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
BIL SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF	3.86%	4.13%	5.03%	4.92%	1.35%	0.00%	0.30%	2.05%	1.66%	0.68%	0.07%
TAIL Cambria Tail Risk ETF	3.48%	2.88%	3.48%	3.74%	1.50%	0.49%	0.36%	1.58%	1.52%	0.91%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BIL and TAIL in my portfolio?

BIL and TAIL have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BIL or TAIL?

TAIL has higher volatility (1.51%) compared to BIL (0.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BIL dropped -0.78% vs TAIL's -52.36%.

Which ETF is better, BIL or TAIL?

On 5-year performance, BIL leads with 3.43% vs -8.40% for TAIL. On fees, BIL is cheaper at 0.14% per year. On volatility, BIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BIL or TAIL?

Over the 5-year period, BIL has performed better with a 3.43% return vs -8.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BIL or TAIL?

BIL is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for TAIL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BIL or TAIL?

BIL has the higher dividend yield at 3.86%, compared with 3.48% for TAIL.

What is the main difference between BIL and TAIL?

BIL is categorized as Government Bonds, while TAIL is Volatility Hedged Equity. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Cambria. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for BIL and 0.59% for TAIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (19.63 vs -1.00), 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.