EDEN vs. RBIL
EDEN (iShares MSCI Denmark ETF) and RBIL (F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EDEN is a Europe Equities fund tracking the MSCI Denmark IMI 25/50 Index, 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, EDEN returned -0.63% vs 4.07% for RBIL. At a correlation of -0.18, they often move in opposite directions. EDEN charges 0.53%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for RBIL.
Performance
EDEN vs. RBIL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EDEN achieves a -3.46% return, which is significantly lower than RBIL's 2.32% return.
EDEN
- 1D
- -0.20%
- 1M
- -1.76%
- YTD
- -3.46%
- 6M
- -3.93%
- 1Y
- -0.63%
- 3Y*
- 3.19%
- 5Y*
- 2.15%
- 10Y*
- 9.32%
RBIL
- 1D
- 0.01%
- 1M
- -0.19%
- YTD
- 2.32%
- 6M
- 2.37%
- 1Y
- 4.07%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EDEN vs. RBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
EDEN iShares MSCI Denmark ETF | -3.46% | 5.23% |
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF | 2.32% | 2.85% |
Correlation
The correlation between EDEN and RBIL is -0.17, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.17 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2025 | -0.18 |
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
EDEN vs. RBIL — Risk / Return Rank
EDEN
RBIL
EDEN vs. RBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Denmark ETF (EDEN) 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.
| EDEN | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -4.38 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -6.59 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 2.13 | -1.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.03 | 7.82 | -7.85 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.06 | 42.95 | -43.02 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EDEN vs. RBIL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EDEN drawdown since its inception was -36.61%, which is greater than RBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EDEN and RBIL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EDEN | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.61% | -0.52% | -36.09% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.17% | -0.52% | -20.65% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -29.31% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -36.61% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -36.61% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.92% | -0.50% | -13.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.38% | -0.07% | -7.31% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.81% | 0.10% | +9.71% |
Volatility
EDEN vs. RBIL - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI Denmark ETF (EDEN) has a higher volatility of 4.76% compared to F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) at 0.36%. This indicates that EDEN'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
| EDEN | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.76% | 0.36% | +4.40% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.73% | 0.85% | +14.88% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.72% | 0.95% | +19.77% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.27% | 1.07% | +19.20% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.23% | 1.07% | +18.16% |
EDEN vs. RBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison
EDEN has a 0.53% expense ratio, which is higher than RBIL's 0.17% expense ratio.
Dividends
EDEN vs. RBIL - Dividend Comparison
EDEN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.17%, less than RBIL's 4.38% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EDEN iShares MSCI Denmark ETF | 3.17% | 2.79% | 1.50% | 1.92% | 1.47% | 0.74% | 0.42% | 2.36% | 2.01% | 2.03% | 1.28% | 1.46% |
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF | 4.38% | 3.65% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EDEN and RBIL have a correlation of -0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EDEN has higher volatility (4.76%) compared to RBIL (0.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EDEN dropped -36.61% vs RBIL's -0.52%.
On 1-year performance, RBIL leads with 4.07% vs -0.63% for EDEN. 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.
Over the 1-year period, RBIL has performed better with a 4.07% return vs -0.63%. 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 0.53% for EDEN.
RBIL has the higher dividend yield at 4.38%, compared with 3.17% for EDEN.
EDEN is categorized as Europe Equities, while RBIL is Inflation-Protected Bonds. EDEN tracks MSCI Denmark IMI 25/50 Index, while RBIL tracks Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and F/m. Their fees differ too: 0.53% for EDEN and 0.17% for RBIL.
RBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.35 vs -0.03), 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 EDEN 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