FEBZ vs. BILS
FEBZ (TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF) and BILS (SPDR Bloomberg 3-12 Month T-Bill ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FEBZ is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the S&P 500 Price Index, while BILS is a Ultrashort Bond fund tracking the Bloomberg 3-12 Month U.S. Treasury Bill Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FEBZ returned 11.22%/yr vs 3.29%/yr for BILS. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. FEBZ charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for BILS.
Performance
FEBZ vs. BILS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FEBZ achieves a 7.99% return, which is significantly higher than BILS's 1.40% return.
FEBZ
- 1D
- -0.49%
- 1M
- 4.07%
- YTD
- 7.99%
- 6M
- 7.75%
- 1Y
- 20.13%
- 3Y*
- 15.79%
- 5Y*
- 11.22%
- 10Y*
- —
BILS
- 1D
- -0.01%
- 1M
- 0.28%
- YTD
- 1.40%
- 6M
- 1.73%
- 1Y
- 3.90%
- 3Y*
- 4.66%
- 5Y*
- 3.29%
- 10Y*
- —
FEBZ vs. BILS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FEBZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF | 7.99% | 12.97% | 16.88% | 20.65% | -10.32% | 20.51% |
BILS SPDR Bloomberg 3-12 Month T-Bill ETF | 1.40% | 4.23% | 5.17% | 4.92% | 0.90% | -0.09% |
Correlation
The correlation between FEBZ and BILS is -0.01, 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 | -0.01 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.01 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.01 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2021 | -0.01 |
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
FEBZ vs. BILS — Risk / Return Rank
FEBZ
BILS
FEBZ vs. BILS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF (FEBZ) and SPDR Bloomberg 3-12 Month T-Bill ETF (BILS). 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.
| FEBZ | BILS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -14.63 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -97.82 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 42.08 | -40.68 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.83 | 129.91 | -127.08 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.21 | 1,442.41 | -1,430.20 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FEBZ | BILS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.17 | 16.80 | -14.63 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 | 10.79 | -9.89 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.00 | 9.79 | -8.79 |
Drawdowns
FEBZ vs. BILS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FEBZ drawdown since its inception was -17.50%, which is greater than BILS's maximum drawdown of -0.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBZ and BILS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FEBZ | BILS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.50% | -0.41% | -17.09% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.14% | -0.03% | -7.11% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.68% | -0.04% | -14.64% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.50% | -0.38% | -17.12% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.49% | -0.01% | -0.48% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.32% | -0.04% | -3.28% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.65% | 0.00% | +1.65% |
Volatility
FEBZ vs. BILS - Volatility Comparison
TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF (FEBZ) has a higher volatility of 2.29% compared to SPDR Bloomberg 3-12 Month T-Bill ETF (BILS) at 0.06%. This indicates that FEBZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BILS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FEBZ | BILS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.29% | 0.06% | +2.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.09% | 0.14% | +6.95% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.34% | 0.23% | +9.11% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.47% | 0.31% | +12.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.35% | 0.30% | +12.05% |
FEBZ vs. BILS - Expense Ratio Comparison
FEBZ has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than BILS's 0.14% expense ratio.
Dividends
FEBZ vs. BILS - Dividend Comparison
FEBZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.96%, less than BILS's 3.81% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BILS SPDR Bloomberg 3-12 Month T-Bill ETF | 3.81% | 4.08% | 5.01% | 4.98% | 1.61% |
FEBZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF | 2.96% | 3.20% | 3.88% | 6.81% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FEBZ and BILS have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FEBZ has higher volatility (2.29%) compared to BILS (0.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBZ dropped -17.50% vs BILS's -0.41%.
On 5-year performance, FEBZ leads with 11.22% vs 3.29% for BILS. On fees, BILS is cheaper at 0.14% per year. On volatility, BILS has been the lower-risk option at 0.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, FEBZ has performed better with a 11.22% return vs 3.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BILS is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for FEBZ.
BILS has the higher dividend yield at 3.81%, compared with 2.96% for FEBZ.
FEBZ is categorized as Defined Outcome, while BILS is Ultrashort Bond. FEBZ tracks S&P 500 Price Index, while BILS tracks Bloomberg 3-12 Month U.S. Treasury Bill Index. They also come from different issuers: TrueShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for FEBZ and 0.14% for BILS.
BILS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (16.80 vs 2.17), 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.
Find the right allocation for FEBZ and BILS
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