EZBC vs. ILS

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

EZBC (Franklin Bitcoin ETF) and ILS (Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EZBC is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate - New York Variant, while ILS is a Nontraditional Bonds fund actively managed by Brookmont. EZBC is passively managed, while ILS is actively managed. Over the past year, EZBC returned -39.76% vs 7.81% for ILS. At a correlation of -0.12, they often move in opposite directions. EZBC charges 0.19%/yr vs 1.58%/yr for ILS.

Performance

EZBC vs. ILS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Bitcoin ETF (EZBC) and Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EZBC achieves a -28.83% return, which is significantly lower than ILS's 2.27% return.

EZBC

• 1D: -3.22%
• 1M: -17.79%
• YTD: -28.83%
• 6M: -28.96%
• 1Y: -39.76%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ILS

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 1.26%
• YTD: 2.27%
• 6M: 2.63%
• 1Y: 7.81%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EZBC vs. ILS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
EZBC Franklin Bitcoin ETF	-28.83%	5.95%
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	2.27%	3.54%

Correlation

The correlation between EZBC and ILS is -0.08, 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	-0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2025	-0.12

Return for Risk

EZBC vs. ILS — Risk / Return Rank

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

EZBC

EZBC Risk / Return Rank: 2
EZBC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
EZBC Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
EZBC Omega Ratio Rank: 2
EZBC Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
EZBC Martin Ratio Rank: 2

ILS

ILS Risk / Return Rank: 96
ILS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
ILS Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
ILS Omega Ratio Rank: 95
ILS Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
ILS Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

EZBC vs. ILS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Bitcoin ETF (EZBC) and Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS). 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.

	EZBC	ILS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.90	3.06	-3.96
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.26	5.05	-6.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.86	1.69	-0.83
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.77	14.18	-14.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.30	52.13	-53.43

EZBC vs. ILS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EZBC Sharpe Ratio is -0.90, which is lower than the ILS Sharpe Ratio of 3.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EZBC and ILS, 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

EZBC vs. ILS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EZBC drawdown since its inception was -52.07%, which is greater than ILS's maximum drawdown of -2.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EZBC and ILS.

Drawdown Indicators

	EZBC	ILS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-52.07%	-2.46%	-49.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-52.07%	-0.55%	-51.52%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-50.46%	0.00%	-50.46%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.89%	-0.54%	-16.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	30.56%	0.15%	+30.41%

Volatility

EZBC vs. ILS - Volatility Comparison

Franklin Bitcoin ETF (EZBC) has a higher volatility of 13.04% compared to Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) at 0.84%. This indicates that EZBC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ILS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EZBC	ILS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.04%	0.84%	+12.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	34.61%	1.68%	+32.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	44.23%	2.58%	+41.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	50.15%	3.77%	+46.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	50.15%	3.77%	+46.38%

EZBC vs. ILS - Expense Ratio Comparison

EZBC has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than ILS's 1.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

EZBC vs. ILS - Dividend Comparison

EZBC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ILS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.05%.

Position	TTM	2025
EZBC Franklin Bitcoin ETF	0.00%	0.00%
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	8.05%	6.06%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EZBC and ILS in my portfolio?

EZBC and ILS have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EZBC or ILS?

EZBC has higher volatility (13.04%) compared to ILS (0.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EZBC dropped -52.07% vs ILS's -2.46%.

Which ETF is better, EZBC or ILS?

On 1-year performance, ILS leads with 7.81% vs -39.76% for EZBC. On fees, EZBC is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, ILS has been the lower-risk option at 0.84%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EZBC or ILS?

Over the 1-year period, ILS has performed better with a 7.81% return vs -39.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EZBC or ILS?

EZBC is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 1.58% for ILS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EZBC or ILS?

ILS has the higher dividend yield at 8.05%, compared with 0.00% for EZBC.

What is the main difference between EZBC and ILS?

EZBC is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while ILS is Nontraditional Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Brookmont. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for EZBC and 1.58% for ILS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ILS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.06 vs -0.90), 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.