CLSM vs. RBIL
CLSM (ETC Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF) and RBIL (F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CLSM is a Tactical Allocation fund tracking the Actively Managed, while RBIL is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, CLSM returned 26.80% vs 3.81% for RBIL. Their -0.13 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. CLSM charges 0.82%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for RBIL.
Performance
CLSM vs. RBIL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CLSM achieves a 17.92% return, which is significantly higher than RBIL's 2.61% return.
CLSM
- 1D
- -0.12%
- 1M
- 0.76%
- 6M
- 15.77%
- YTD
- 17.92%
- 1Y
- 26.80%
- 3Y*
- 12.99%
- 5Y*
- 3.55%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 3.57%
RBIL
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- 0.18%
- 6M
- 2.25%
- YTD
- 2.61%
- 1Y
- 3.81%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 3.81%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $151.13K | $524.40K | $331.03K | |
| $1.19M | $1.87M | $2.26M |
CLSM vs. RBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CLSM ETC Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF | 17.92% | 12.65% |
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF | 2.61% | 2.85% |
Correlation
The correlation between CLSM and RBIL is -0.16, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.16 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2025 | -0.13 |
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
CLSM vs. RBIL — Risk / Return Rank
CLSM
RBIL
CLSM vs. RBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETC Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM) and F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL). 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.
| CLSM | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.16 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.65 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 2.00 | -0.68 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.17 | 6.80 | -3.63 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.98 | 27.52 | -17.54 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CLSM vs. RBIL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CLSM drawdown since its inception was -27.77%, which is greater than RBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLSM and RBIL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CLSM | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -27.77% | -0.56% | -27.21% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.50% | -0.56% | -7.94% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.60% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -27.77% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.48% | -0.22% | -2.26% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.06% | -0.08% | -15.98% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.69% | 0.14% | +2.55% |
Volatility
CLSM vs. RBIL - Volatility Comparison
ETC Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM) has a higher volatility of 5.10% compared to F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) at 0.28%. This indicates that CLSM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RBIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CLSM | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.10% | 0.28% | +4.82% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.75% | 0.89% | +11.86% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.82% | 0.96% | +13.86% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.82% | 1.06% | +11.76% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.80% | 1.06% | +11.74% |
CLSM vs. RBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison
CLSM has a 0.82% expense ratio, which is higher than RBIL's 0.17% expense ratio.
Dividends
CLSM vs. RBIL - Dividend Comparison
CLSM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.76%, less than RBIL's 4.16% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CLSM ETC Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF | 0.76% | 0.90% | 2.13% | 2.58% | 3.17% | 0.59% |
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF | 4.16% | 3.65% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CLSM and RBIL have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CLSM has higher volatility (5.10%) compared to RBIL (0.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CLSM dropped -27.77% vs RBIL's -0.56%.
On 1-year performance, CLSM leads with 26.80% vs 3.81% for RBIL. On fees, RBIL is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, RBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CLSM has performed better with a 26.80% return vs 3.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RBIL is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.82% for CLSM.
RBIL has the higher dividend yield at 4.16%, compared with 0.76% for CLSM.
CLSM is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while RBIL is Inflation-Protected Bonds. CLSM tracks Actively Managed, while RBIL tracks Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. They also come from different issuers: Cabana and F/m. Their fees differ too: 0.82% for CLSM and 0.17% for RBIL.
RBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.98 vs 1.82), 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.
Find the right allocation for CLSM and RBIL
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