PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FALN vs. IBIT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FALN vs. IBIT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF (FALN) and iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FALN achieves a 1.56% return, which is significantly higher than IBIT's -25.48% return.


FALN

1D
-0.22%
1M
0.68%
YTD
1.56%
6M
1.36%
1Y
8.66%
3Y*
9.18%
5Y*
3.78%
10Y*

IBIT

1D
-2.76%
1M
-18.50%
YTD
-25.48%
6M
-29.84%
1Y
-38.74%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FALN vs. IBIT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
FALN
iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF
1.56%8.92%6.63%
IBIT
iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF
-25.48%-6.41%99.21%

Correlation

The correlation between FALN and IBIT is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.40

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 12, 2024

0.33

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

FALN vs. IBIT — Risk / Return Rank

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

FALN
FALN Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
FALN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FALN Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
FALN Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
FALN Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
FALN Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
Martin Ratio Rank

IBIT
IBIT Risk / Return Rank: 22
Overall Rank
IBIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBIT Omega Ratio Rank: 22
Omega Ratio Rank
IBIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBIT Martin Ratio Rank: 22
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.

FALN vs. IBIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF (FALN) and iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT). 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.


FALNIBITDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.91

-0.89

+2.80

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.78

-1.23

+4.00

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

0.86

+0.51

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.20

-0.79

+2.98

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

9.17

-1.36

+10.53

FALN vs. IBIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FALN Sharpe Ratio is 1.91, which is higher than the IBIT Sharpe Ratio of -0.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FALN and IBIT, 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


FALNIBITDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.91

-0.89

+2.80

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.52

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.74

0.30

+0.44

Drawdowns

FALN vs. IBIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FALN drawdown since its inception was -29.22%, smaller than the maximum IBIT drawdown of -49.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FALN and IBIT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FALNIBITDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-29.22%

-49.36%

+20.14%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.96%

-49.36%

+45.40%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.92%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.78%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.26%

-48.10%

+47.84%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.32%

-16.02%

+12.70%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.95%

28.44%

-27.49%

Volatility

FALN vs. IBIT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF (FALN) is 1.38%, while iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT) has a volatility of 9.50%. This indicates that FALN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IBIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FALNIBITDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.38%

9.50%

-8.12%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.64%

34.44%

-30.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.54%

43.73%

-39.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.31%

50.19%

-42.88%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.95%

50.19%

-41.24%

FALN vs. IBIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FALN and IBIT have an expense ratio of 0.25%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

FALN vs. IBIT - Dividend Comparison

FALN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.46%, while IBIT has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
FALN
iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF
6.46%6.31%6.24%5.37%5.08%3.40%5.14%5.35%5.97%6.98%3.55%
IBIT
iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF
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


FALN and IBIT have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IBIT has higher volatility (9.50%) compared to FALN (1.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FALN dropped -29.22% vs IBIT's -49.36%.

On 1-year performance, FALN leads with 8.66% vs -38.74% for IBIT. Both ETFs have the same 0.25% expense ratio. On volatility, FALN has been the lower-risk option at 1.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FALN has performed better with a 8.66% return vs -38.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FALN and IBIT have the same expense ratio: 0.25% per year.

FALN has the higher dividend yield at 6.46%, compared with 0.00% for IBIT.

FALN is categorized as High Yield Bonds, while IBIT is Cryptocurrency. FALN tracks Bloomberg US High Yield Fallen Angel 3% Capped Index, while IBIT tracks CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate - New York Variant.

FALN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.91 vs -0.89), 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 FALN and IBIT

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