BTOT vs. CFIT

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BTOT (iShares Total USD Fixed Income Market ETF) and CFIT (Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BTOT is a Total Bond Market fund tracking the Bloomberg US Total Fixed Income Market Index, while CFIT is a Intermediate Core-Plus Bond fund actively managed by Cambria. BTOT is passively managed, while CFIT is actively managed. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BTOT charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.71%/yr for CFIT.

Performance

BTOT vs. CFIT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Total USD Fixed Income Market ETF (BTOT) and Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF (CFIT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BTOT achieves a 0.62% return, which is significantly lower than CFIT's 5.42% return.

BTOT

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 0.66%
• YTD: 0.62%
• 6M: 0.75%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CFIT

• 1D: -0.50%
• 1M: 0.79%
• YTD: 5.42%
• 6M: 5.04%
• 1Y: 11.29%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BTOT vs. CFIT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BTOT iShares Total USD Fixed Income Market ETF	0.62%	0.12%
CFIT Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF	5.42%	-0.25%

Correlation

The correlation between BTOT and CFIT is 0.60, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 11, 2025	0.60

Return for Risk

BTOT vs. CFIT — Risk / Return Rank

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

BTOT

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

CFIT

CFIT Risk / Return Rank: 63
CFIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
CFIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
CFIT Omega Ratio Rank: 67
CFIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
CFIT Martin Ratio Rank: 60

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.

BTOT vs. CFIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Total USD Fixed Income Market ETF (BTOT) and Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF (CFIT). 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.

	BTOT	CFIT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.95	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.73	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.37	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	2.68	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	9.86	—

Drawdowns

BTOT vs. CFIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BTOT drawdown since its inception was -2.36%, smaller than the maximum CFIT drawdown of -4.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BTOT and CFIT.

Drawdown Indicators

	BTOT	CFIT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.36%	-4.23%	+1.87%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-4.23%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.96%	-0.78%	-0.18%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.79%	-1.19%	+0.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	1.15%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BTOT	CFIT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	2.19%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	4.68%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.70%	5.82%	-2.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.70%	5.64%	-1.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.70%	5.64%	-1.94%

BTOT vs. CFIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

BTOT has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than CFIT's 0.71% expense ratio.

Dividends

BTOT vs. CFIT - Dividend Comparison

BTOT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.12%, less than CFIT's 3.86% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
BTOT iShares Total USD Fixed Income Market ETF	2.12%	0.22%
CFIT Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF	3.86%	3.14%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BTOT and CFIT in my portfolio?

BTOT and CFIT have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BTOT or CFIT?

On fees, BTOT is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BTOT or CFIT?

BTOT is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.71% for CFIT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BTOT or CFIT?

CFIT has the higher dividend yield at 3.86%, compared with 2.12% for BTOT.

What is the main difference between BTOT and CFIT?

BTOT is categorized as Total Bond Market, while CFIT is Intermediate Core-Plus Bond. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Cambria. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for BTOT and 0.71% for CFIT.