PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CFIT vs. IMTB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CFIT vs. IMTB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF (CFIT) and iShares Core 5-10 Year USD Bond ETF (IMTB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CFIT achieves a 6.14% return, which is significantly higher than IMTB's 0.28% return.


CFIT

1D
0.28%
1M
2.43%
YTD
6.14%
6M
6.20%
1Y
13.11%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

IMTB

1D
0.08%
1M
0.01%
YTD
0.28%
6M
0.54%
1Y
6.33%
3Y*
4.86%
5Y*
0.61%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CFIT vs. IMTB - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between CFIT and IMTB is 0.59, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.59

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2025

0.60

The correlation between CFIT and IMTB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

CFIT vs. IMTB — Risk / Return Rank

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

CFIT
CFIT Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
CFIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CFIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
CFIT Omega Ratio Rank: 7676
Omega Ratio Rank
CFIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
CFIT Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank

IMTB
IMTB Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
IMTB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IMTB Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
IMTB Omega Ratio Rank: 4444
Omega Ratio Rank
IMTB Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
IMTB Martin Ratio Rank: 4141
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.

CFIT vs. IMTB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF (CFIT) and iShares Core 5-10 Year USD Bond ETF (IMTB). 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.


CFITIMTBDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.40

1.58

+0.82

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.38

2.40

+0.97

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.46

1.28

+0.18

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.07

2.14

+0.93

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

11.57

6.69

+4.88

CFIT vs. IMTB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CFIT Sharpe Ratio is 2.40, which is higher than the IMTB Sharpe Ratio of 1.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CFIT and IMTB, 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


CFITIMTBDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.40

1.58

+0.82

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.10

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.55

0.37

+1.18

Drawdowns

CFIT vs. IMTB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CFIT drawdown since its inception was -4.23%, smaller than the maximum IMTB drawdown of -18.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CFIT and IMTB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CFITIMTBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-4.23%

-18.15%

+13.92%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.23%

-2.86%

-1.37%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-6.80%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.11%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-1.44%

+1.44%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.21%

-4.13%

+2.92%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.12%

0.91%

+0.21%

Volatility

CFIT vs. IMTB - Volatility Comparison

Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF (CFIT) has a higher volatility of 1.63% compared to iShares Core 5-10 Year USD Bond ETF (IMTB) at 1.43%. This indicates that CFIT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IMTB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CFITIMTBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.63%

1.43%

+0.20%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.37%

3.02%

+1.35%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.49%

4.04%

+1.45%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.45%

6.28%

-0.83%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.45%

5.18%

+0.27%

CFIT vs. IMTB - Expense Ratio Comparison

CFIT has a 0.71% expense ratio, which is higher than IMTB's 0.06% expense ratio.


Dividends

CFIT vs. IMTB - Dividend Comparison

CFIT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.07%, less than IMTB's 4.51% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
CFIT
Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF
4.07%3.14%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
IMTB
iShares Core 5-10 Year USD Bond ETF
4.51%4.40%4.42%4.13%2.90%2.49%2.63%2.91%3.04%2.75%0.40%

Frequently Asked Questions


CFIT and IMTB have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CFIT has higher volatility (1.63%) compared to IMTB (1.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CFIT dropped -4.23% vs IMTB's -18.15%.

On 1-year performance, CFIT leads with 13.11% vs 6.33% for IMTB. On fees, IMTB is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, IMTB has been the lower-risk option at 1.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, CFIT has performed better with a 13.11% return vs 6.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IMTB is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.71% for CFIT.

IMTB has the higher dividend yield at 4.51%, compared with 4.07% for CFIT.

They also come from different issuers: Cambria and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.71% for CFIT and 0.06% for IMTB.

CFIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs 1.58), 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 CFIT and IMTB

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