PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FAAR vs. BINC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FAAR vs. BINC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) and iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FAAR achieves a 14.32% return, which is significantly higher than BINC's 1.28% return.


FAAR

1D
-1.43%
1M
-2.21%
6M
6.89%
YTD
14.32%
1Y
20.01%
3Y*
8.41%
5Y*
7.00%
10Y*
4.20%
ALL TIME*
4.09%

BINC

1D
0.17%
1M
-0.09%
6M
0.61%
YTD
1.28%
1Y
4.32%
3Y*
6.74%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
6.80%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$71.39M$77.02M$122.86M
$1.39M$1.09M$1.71M

FAAR vs. BINC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
FAAR
First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF
14.32%8.07%5.97%-2.97%
BINC
iShares Flexible Income Active ETF
1.28%7.57%5.76%7.12%

Correlation

The correlation between FAAR and BINC is -0.29, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

-0.29

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

-0.09

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 23, 2023

-0.08

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between FAAR and BINC has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.08 to -0.29, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.

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

FAAR vs. BINC — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FAAR
FAAR Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
FAAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FAAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
FAAR Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
FAAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
FAAR Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
Martin Ratio Rank

BINC
BINC Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
BINC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BINC Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
BINC Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
BINC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4545
Calmar Ratio Rank
BINC Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FAAR vs. BINC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) and iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC). 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.


FAARBINCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.34

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.35

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.00

1.61

+0.38

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.00

6.20

-0.20

FAAR vs. BINC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FAAR Sharpe Ratio is 1.58, which is comparable to the BINC Sharpe Ratio of 1.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FAAR and BINC, 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

FAAR vs. BINC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FAAR drawdown since its inception was -18.03%, which is greater than BINC's maximum drawdown of -2.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FAAR and BINC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FAARBINCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.03%

-2.69%

-15.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.08%

-2.69%

-7.39%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.54%

-2.69%

-8.85%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.03%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-18.03%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-10.08%

-0.32%

-9.76%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.83%

-0.36%

-7.47%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.35%

0.70%

+2.65%

Volatility

FAAR vs. BINC - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) has a higher volatility of 2.52% compared to iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) at 0.80%. This indicates that FAAR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BINC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FAARBINCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.52%

0.80%

+1.72%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.47%

2.00%

+7.47%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.76%

2.35%

+10.41%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.89%

2.97%

+8.92%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.55%

2.97%

+8.58%

FAAR vs. BINC - Expense Ratio Comparison

FAAR has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than BINC's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

FAAR vs. BINC - Dividend Comparison

FAAR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.01%, more than BINC's 5.88% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
BINC
iShares Flexible Income Active ETF
5.88%5.86%6.14%3.13%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
FAAR
First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF
10.01%11.63%3.45%3.20%5.82%6.49%3.05%1.02%0.58%2.83%

Frequently Asked Questions


FAAR and BINC have a correlation of -0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FAAR has higher volatility (2.52%) compared to BINC (0.80%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FAAR dropped -18.03% vs BINC's -2.69%.

On 3-year performance, FAAR leads with 8.41% vs 6.74% for BINC. On fees, BINC is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, BINC has been the lower-risk option at 0.80%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, FAAR has performed better with a 8.41% return vs 6.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BINC is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FAAR.

FAAR has the higher dividend yield at 10.01%, compared with 5.88% for BINC.

FAAR is categorized as Commodities, while BINC is Multisector Bonds. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for FAAR and 0.40% for BINC.

BINC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.85 vs 1.58), 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 FAAR and BINC

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