CAS vs. BIL
CAS (Simplify China A Shares PLUS Income ETF) and BIL (SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CAS is a China Equities fund actively managed by Simplify, while BIL is a Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg 1-3 Month U.S. Treasury Bill Index. CAS is actively managed, while BIL is passively managed. Their -0.34 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. CAS charges 0.88%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for BIL.
Performance
CAS vs. BIL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
CAS
- 1D
- 1.08%
- 1M
- -11.07%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
BIL
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 0.26%
- 6M
- 1.78%
- YTD
- 2.08%
- 1Y
- 3.76%
- 3Y*
- 4.56%
- 5Y*
- 3.54%
- 10Y*
- 2.24%
- ALL TIME*
- 1.37%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $778.54M | $838.53M | $900.58M | |
| $38.47K | $52.48K | $79.55K |
CAS vs. BIL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
CAS Simplify China A Shares PLUS Income ETF | -11.11% |
BIL SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF | 0.65% |
Correlation
The correlation between CAS and BIL is -0.34, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 28, 2026 | -0.34 |
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
CAS vs. BIL — Risk / Return Rank
CAS
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
BIL
CAS vs. BIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Simplify China A Shares PLUS Income ETF (CAS) and SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF (BIL). 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.
| CAS | BIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 69.35 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 349.28 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 2,476.90 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CAS vs. BIL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CAS drawdown since its inception was -15.89%, which is greater than BIL's maximum drawdown of -0.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAS and BIL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CAS | BIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.89% | -0.78% | -15.11% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -0.01% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -0.01% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -0.08% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -0.21% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.28% | 0.00% | -14.28% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.19% | -0.26% | -5.93% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.00% | — |
Volatility
CAS vs. BIL - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CAS | BIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.07% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 0.14% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 33.97% | 0.20% | +33.77% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 33.97% | 0.26% | +33.71% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 33.97% | 0.26% | +33.71% |
CAS vs. BIL - Expense Ratio Comparison
CAS has a 0.88% expense ratio, which is higher than BIL's 0.14% expense ratio.
Dividends
CAS vs. BIL - Dividend Comparison
CAS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.46%, less than BIL's 3.81% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BIL SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF | 3.46% | 4.13% | 5.03% | 4.92% | 1.35% | 0.00% | 0.30% | 2.05% | 1.66% | 0.68% | 0.07% |
CAS Simplify China A Shares PLUS Income ETF | 2.46% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CAS and BIL have a correlation of -0.34, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BIL is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BIL is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.88% for CAS.
BIL has the higher dividend yield at 3.46%, compared with 2.46% for CAS.
CAS is categorized as China Equities, while BIL is Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Simplify and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.88% for CAS and 0.14% for BIL.
Find the right allocation for CAS and BIL
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