PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ERNA.L vs. BIL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ERNA.L vs. BIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares USD Ultrashort Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ERNA.L) and SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF (BIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ERNA.L achieves a 1.64% return, which is significantly higher than BIL's 1.49% return.


ERNA.L

1D
0.11%
1M
0.35%
YTD
1.64%
6M
1.95%
1Y
4.36%
3Y*
5.21%
5Y*
3.77%
10Y*

BIL

1D
0.00%
1M
0.27%
YTD
1.49%
6M
1.76%
1Y
3.87%
3Y*
4.64%
5Y*
3.41%
10Y*
2.18%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ERNA.L vs. BIL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
ERNA.L
iShares USD Ultrashort Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
1.64%4.75%5.66%5.50%1.46%0.11%1.27%3.19%1.09%
BIL
SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF
1.49%4.15%5.19%4.94%1.40%-0.10%0.40%2.03%0.97%

Correlation

The correlation between ERNA.L and BIL is -0.05, 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

-0.05

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.05

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.08

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 4, 2018

0.07

The correlation between ERNA.L and BIL shifts across timeframes, from -0.05 (1 year) to 0.08 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

ERNA.L vs. BIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

ERNA.L
ERNA.L Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
ERNA.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ERNA.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
ERNA.L Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
ERNA.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
ERNA.L Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank

BIL
BIL Risk / Return Rank: 100100
Overall Rank
BIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 100100
Sortino Ratio Rank
BIL Omega Ratio Rank: 100100
Omega Ratio Rank
BIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 100100
Calmar Ratio Rank
BIL Martin Ratio Rank: 100100
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.

ERNA.L vs. BIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares USD Ultrashort Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ERNA.L) and SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF (BIL). 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.


ERNA.LBILDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-15.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-165.86

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

2.31

87.91

-85.60

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

21.10

355.35

-334.25

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

82.85

2,817.77

-2,734.92

ERNA.L vs. BIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ERNA.L Sharpe Ratio is 4.65, which is lower than the BIL Sharpe Ratio of 19.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ERNA.L and BIL, 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


ERNA.LBILDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.65

19.71

-15.06

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

4.03

13.15

-9.12

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

8.51

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.43

2.78

-1.35

Drawdowns

ERNA.L vs. BIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ERNA.L drawdown since its inception was -8.63%, which is greater than BIL's maximum drawdown of -0.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ERNA.L and BIL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ERNA.LBILDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-8.63%

-0.78%

-7.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.20%

-0.01%

-0.19%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-0.38%

-0.01%

-0.37%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-0.81%

-0.10%

-0.71%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-0.21%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.10%

-0.26%

+0.16%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.05%

0.00%

+0.05%

Volatility

ERNA.L vs. BIL - Volatility Comparison

iShares USD Ultrashort Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (ERNA.L) has a higher volatility of 0.30% compared to SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF (BIL) at 0.06%. This indicates that ERNA.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ERNA.LBILDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.30%

0.06%

+0.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.86%

0.13%

+0.73%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.93%

0.20%

+0.73%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

0.93%

0.26%

+0.67%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

2.17%

0.26%

+1.91%

ERNA.L vs. BIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

ERNA.L has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than BIL's 0.14% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

ERNA.L vs. BIL - Dividend Comparison

ERNA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.86%.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
BIL
SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF
3.86%4.13%5.03%4.92%1.35%0.00%0.30%2.05%1.66%0.68%0.07%
ERNA.L
iShares USD Ultrashort Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


ERNA.L and BIL have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ERNA.L is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ERNA.L is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.14% for BIL.

ERNA.L is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while BIL is Government Bonds. ERNA.L tracks Bloomberg US Corp 1-3 Yr TR USD, while BIL tracks Bloomberg 1-3 Month U.S. Treasury Bill Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for ERNA.L and 0.14% for BIL.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ERNA.L and BIL

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