PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ELM vs. RBIL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ELM vs. RBIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Elm Market Navigator ETF (ELM) and F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ELM achieves a 7.82% return, which is significantly higher than RBIL's 2.31% return.


ELM

1D
0.17%
1M
1.28%
YTD
7.82%
6M
8.21%
1Y
20.07%
3Y*
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)

ELM vs. RBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between ELM and RBIL is -0.22, 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

-0.22

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2025

-0.22

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

ELM vs. RBIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

ELM
ELM Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
ELM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6565
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ELM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
ELM Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
ELM Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
ELM Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank

RBIL
RBIL Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
RBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
RBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
RBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
RBIL Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
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.

ELM vs. RBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Elm Market Navigator ETF (ELM) 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.


ELMRBILDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.10

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.49

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

2.06

-0.67

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.68

7.59

-4.90

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.95

44.07

-33.12

ELM vs. RBIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ELM Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is lower than the RBIL Sharpe Ratio of 4.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ELM 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

ELM vs. RBIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ELM drawdown since its inception was -9.02%, which is greater than RBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ELM and RBIL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ELMRBILDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-9.02%

-0.52%

-8.50%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.52%

-0.52%

-7.00%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.34%

-0.51%

+0.17%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.32%

-0.07%

-1.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.84%

0.09%

+1.75%

Volatility

ELM vs. RBIL - Volatility Comparison

Elm Market Navigator ETF (ELM) has a higher volatility of 3.36% compared to F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) at 0.36%. This indicates that ELM'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


ELMRBILDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.36%

0.36%

+3.00%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.98%

0.85%

+7.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.69%

0.95%

+8.74%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.40%

1.07%

+9.33%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.40%

1.07%

+9.33%

ELM vs. RBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

ELM has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is higher than RBIL's 0.17% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

ELM vs. RBIL - Dividend Comparison

ELM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.52%, less than RBIL's 4.38% yield.


Frequently Asked Questions


ELM and RBIL have a correlation of -0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ELM has higher volatility (3.36%) compared to RBIL (0.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ELM dropped -9.02% vs RBIL's -0.52%.

On 1-year performance, ELM leads with 20.07% 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.

Over the 1-year period, ELM has performed better with a 20.07% return vs 3.95%. 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 0.24% for ELM.

RBIL has the higher dividend yield at 4.38%, compared with 2.52% for ELM.

ELM is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while RBIL is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Elm and F/m. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for ELM and 0.17% for RBIL.

RBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.18 vs 2.08), 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 ELM 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