ECML vs. RBIL

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

ECML (EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF) and RBIL (F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ECML is a Small Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Euclidean, while RBIL is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. ECML is actively managed, while RBIL is passively managed. Over the past year, ECML returned 28.34% vs 3.95% for RBIL. At a correlation of -0.07, they often move in opposite directions. ECML charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for RBIL.

Performance

ECML vs. RBIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF (ECML) and F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ECML achieves a 14.84% return, which is significantly higher than RBIL's 2.31% return.

ECML

• 1D: 0.35%
• 1M: 1.19%
• YTD: 14.84%
• 6M: 13.24%
• 1Y: 28.34%
• 3Y*: 14.43%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RBIL

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: -0.20%
• YTD: 2.31%
• 6M: 2.35%
• 1Y: 3.95%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ECML vs. RBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ECML EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF	14.84%	7.07%
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF	2.31%	2.85%

Correlation

The correlation between ECML and RBIL is -0.10, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2025	-0.07

Return for Risk

ECML vs. RBIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

ECML

ECML Risk / Return Rank: 65
ECML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
ECML Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
ECML Omega Ratio Rank: 55
ECML Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
ECML Martin Ratio Rank: 66

RBIL

RBIL Risk / Return Rank: 97
RBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
RBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
RBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 98
RBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
RBIL Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

ECML vs. RBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF (ECML) 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.

	ECML	RBIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.93	4.18	-2.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.93	6.39	-3.46
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	2.06	-0.73
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.06	7.59	-3.52
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.61	44.07	-32.47

ECML vs. RBIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ECML Sharpe Ratio is 1.93, which is lower than the RBIL Sharpe Ratio of 4.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ECML and RBIL, 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

ECML vs. RBIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ECML drawdown since its inception was -24.66%, which is greater than RBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ECML and RBIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	ECML	RBIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.66%	-0.52%	-24.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.01%	-0.52%	-6.49%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.66%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.06%	-0.51%	-1.55%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.80%	-0.07%	-5.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.45%	0.09%	+2.36%

Volatility

ECML vs. RBIL - Volatility Comparison

EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF (ECML) has a higher volatility of 4.01% compared to F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) at 0.36%. This indicates that ECML'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.

Volatility by Period

	ECML	RBIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.01%	0.36%	+3.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.68%	0.85%	+8.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.79%	0.95%	+13.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.34%	1.07%	+17.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.34%	1.07%	+17.27%

ECML vs. RBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

ECML has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than RBIL's 0.17% expense ratio.

Dividends

ECML vs. RBIL - Dividend Comparison

ECML's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.20%, less than RBIL's 4.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
ECML EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF	1.20%	1.38%	0.98%	0.77%
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF	4.38%	3.65%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ECML and RBIL in my portfolio?

ECML and RBIL 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, ECML or RBIL?

ECML has higher volatility (4.01%) compared to RBIL (0.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ECML dropped -24.66% vs RBIL's -0.52%.

Which ETF is better, ECML or RBIL?

On 1-year performance, ECML leads with 28.34% vs 3.95% for RBIL. On fees, RBIL is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, RBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ECML or RBIL?

Over the 1-year period, ECML has performed better with a 28.34% return vs 3.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ECML or RBIL?

RBIL is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for ECML.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ECML or RBIL?

RBIL has the higher dividend yield at 4.38%, compared with 1.20% for ECML.

What is the main difference between ECML and RBIL?

ECML is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while RBIL is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Euclidean and F/m. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for ECML and 0.17% for RBIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.18 vs 1.93), 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.