BITU vs. ILS

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

BITU (Proshares Ultra Bitcoin ETF) and ILS (Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BITU is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the Bloomberg Bitcoin Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while ILS is a Nontraditional Bonds fund actively managed by Brookmont. BITU is passively managed, while ILS is actively managed. Over the past year, BITU returned -77.50% vs 7.79% for ILS. Their -0.13 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. BITU charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.58%/yr for ILS.

Performance

BITU vs. ILS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Proshares Ultra Bitcoin ETF (BITU) 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, BITU achieves a -57.36% return, which is significantly lower than ILS's 3.55% return.

BITU

• 1D: 2.86%
• 1M: 5.78%
• 6M: -44.05%
• YTD: -57.36%
• 1Y: -77.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -33.87%

ILS

• 1D: 0.05%
• 1M: 0.99%
• 6M: 3.01%
• YTD: 3.55%
• 1Y: 7.79%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 5.34%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BITU Proshares Ultra Bitcoin ETF	$37.97M	$38.90M	$46.19M
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	$404.25K	$506.70K	$656.18K

BITU vs. ILS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BITU Proshares Ultra Bitcoin ETF	-57.36%	-10.50%
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	3.55%	3.54%

Correlation

The correlation between BITU and ILS is -0.10, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2025	-0.13

Return for Risk

BITU vs. ILS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

BITU

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

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) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

BITU vs. ILS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Proshares Ultra Bitcoin ETF (BITU) 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.

	BITU	ILS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.88	3.17	-4.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.66	5.29	-6.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.82	1.74	-0.92
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.93	14.14	-15.07
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.30	53.05	-54.35

BITU vs. ILS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BITU Sharpe Ratio is -0.88, which is lower than the ILS Sharpe Ratio of 3.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BITU 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

BITU vs. ILS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BITU drawdown since its inception was -83.45%, which is greater than ILS's maximum drawdown of -2.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BITU and ILS.

Drawdown Indicators

	BITU	ILS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-83.45%	-2.46%	-80.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-83.45%	-0.55%	-82.90%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-80.93%	0.00%	-80.93%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-37.68%	-0.50%	-37.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	59.52%	0.15%	+59.37%

Volatility

BITU vs. ILS - Volatility Comparison

Proshares Ultra Bitcoin ETF (BITU) has a higher volatility of 17.53% compared to Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) at 0.42%. This indicates that BITU'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

	BITU	ILS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.53%	0.42%	+17.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	68.01%	1.47%	+66.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	88.40%	2.47%	+85.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	96.01%	3.64%	+92.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	96.01%	3.64%	+92.37%

BITU vs. ILS - Expense Ratio Comparison

BITU has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than ILS's 1.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

BITU vs. ILS - Dividend Comparison

BITU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 80.48%, more than ILS's 8.13% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BITU Proshares Ultra Bitcoin ETF	80.48%	50.23%	0.12%
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	8.13%	6.06%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BITU and ILS in my portfolio?

BITU and ILS have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BITU or ILS?

BITU has higher volatility (17.53%) compared to ILS (0.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BITU dropped -83.45% vs ILS's -2.46%.

Which ETF is better, BITU or ILS?

On 1-year performance, ILS leads with 7.79% vs -77.50% for BITU. On fees, BITU is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, ILS has been the lower-risk option at 0.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BITU or ILS?

Over the 1-year period, ILS has performed better with a 7.79% return vs -77.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BITU or ILS?

BITU is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.58% for ILS.

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

BITU has the higher dividend yield at 80.48%, compared with 8.13% for ILS.

What is the main difference between BITU and ILS?

BITU is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while ILS is Nontraditional Bonds. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Brookmont. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for BITU and 1.58% for ILS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ILS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.17 vs -0.88), 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.