PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BINC vs. MBSF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BINC vs. MBSF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) and Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF (MBSF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BINC achieves a 0.90% return, which is significantly lower than MBSF's 1.48% return.


BINC

1D
-0.12%
1M
0.54%
YTD
0.90%
6M
1.22%
1Y
5.80%
3Y*
7.02%
5Y*
10Y*

MBSF

1D
0.12%
1M
-0.03%
YTD
1.48%
6M
2.16%
1Y
5.34%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BINC vs. MBSF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
BINC
iShares Flexible Income Active ETF
0.90%7.57%5.70%
MBSF
Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF
1.48%5.85%5.71%

Correlation

The correlation between BINC and MBSF is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.15

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 29, 2024

0.15

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

BINC vs. MBSF — Risk / Return Rank

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

BINC
BINC Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
BINC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BINC Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
BINC Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
BINC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
BINC Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
Martin Ratio Rank

MBSF
MBSF Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
MBSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MBSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
MBSF Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
MBSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
MBSF Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

BINC vs. MBSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) and Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF (MBSF). 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.


BINCMBSFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.77

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.94

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.51

1.34

+0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.17

6.77

-4.61

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.53

19.20

-10.67

BINC vs. MBSF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BINC Sharpe Ratio is 2.56, which is higher than the MBSF Sharpe Ratio of 1.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BINC and MBSF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BINCMBSFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.56

1.79

+0.77

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

2.36

1.74

+0.62

Drawdowns

BINC vs. MBSF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BINC drawdown since its inception was -2.69%, which is greater than MBSF's maximum drawdown of -0.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BINC and MBSF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BINCMBSFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-2.69%

-0.97%

-1.72%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.69%

-0.79%

-1.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-2.69%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.49%

-0.10%

-0.39%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.36%

-0.23%

-0.13%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.68%

0.28%

+0.40%

Volatility

BINC vs. MBSF - Volatility Comparison

iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) has a higher volatility of 0.75% compared to Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF (MBSF) at 0.64%. This indicates that BINC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MBSF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BINCMBSFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.75%

0.64%

+0.11%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.84%

2.16%

-0.32%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.28%

3.01%

-0.73%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.00%

3.34%

-0.34%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.00%

3.34%

-0.34%

BINC vs. MBSF - Expense Ratio Comparison

BINC has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than MBSF's 0.49% expense ratio.


Dividends

BINC vs. MBSF - Dividend Comparison

BINC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.86%, more than MBSF's 4.49% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
BINC
iShares Flexible Income Active ETF
5.86%5.86%6.14%3.13%
MBSF
Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF
4.49%4.71%4.14%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


BINC and MBSF have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BINC has higher volatility (0.75%) compared to MBSF (0.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BINC dropped -2.69% vs MBSF's -0.97%.

On 1-year performance, BINC leads with 5.80% vs 5.34% for MBSF. On fees, BINC is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, MBSF has been the lower-risk option at 0.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BINC has performed better with a 5.80% return vs 5.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BINC is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for MBSF.

BINC has the higher dividend yield at 5.86%, compared with 4.49% for MBSF.

BINC is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while MBSF is Bank Loan. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Regan. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for BINC and 0.49% for MBSF.

BINC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.56 vs 1.79), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BINC and MBSF

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