FLAO vs. RBIL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FLAO (AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Floor5 Apr/Oct ETF) and RBIL (F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLAO is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Allianz, while RBIL is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. FLAO is actively managed, while RBIL is passively managed. Over the past year, FLAO returned 4.33% vs 4.57% for RBIL. At a correlation of -0.21, they often move in opposite directions. FLAO charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for RBIL.

Performance

FLAO vs. RBIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Floor5 Apr/Oct ETF (FLAO) and F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLAO achieves a -0.85% return, which is significantly lower than RBIL's 2.70% return.

FLAO

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: 0.99%
• YTD: -0.85%
• 6M: -0.46%
• 1Y: 4.33%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RBIL

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: 0.38%
• YTD: 2.70%
• 6M: 2.79%
• 1Y: 4.57%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FLAO vs. RBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FLAO AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Floor5 Apr/Oct ETF	-0.85%	2.03%
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF	2.70%	2.91%

Correlation

The correlation between FLAO and RBIL is -0.27, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.27
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 26, 2025	-0.21

Return for Risk

FLAO vs. RBIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLAO

FLAO Risk / Return Rank: 22
FLAO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
FLAO Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
FLAO Omega Ratio Rank: 27
FLAO Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
FLAO Martin Ratio Rank: 21

RBIL

RBIL Risk / Return Rank: 98
RBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
RBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
RBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 98
RBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
RBIL 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.

FLAO vs. RBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Floor5 Apr/Oct ETF (FLAO) and F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL). 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.

	FLAO	RBIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.76	5.01	-4.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.06	7.92	-6.86
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	2.39	-1.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.57	17.00	-16.43
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.41	70.66	-68.25
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FLAO vs. RBIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLAO Sharpe Ratio is 0.76, which is lower than the RBIL Sharpe Ratio of 5.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLAO and RBIL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FLAO	RBIL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.76	5.01	-4.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.76	4.28	-3.52

Drawdowns

FLAO vs. RBIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLAO drawdown since its inception was -10.12%, which is greater than RBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLAO and RBIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLAO	RBIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.12%	-0.50%	-9.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.60%	-0.27%	-7.33%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.07%	0.00%	-2.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.90%	-0.06%	-1.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.80%	0.07%	+1.73%

Volatility

FLAO vs. RBIL - Volatility Comparison

AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Floor5 Apr/Oct ETF (FLAO) has a higher volatility of 0.32% compared to F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) at 0.30%. This indicates that FLAO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RBIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FLAO	RBIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.32%	0.30%	+0.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.15%	0.79%	+4.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.69%	0.92%	+4.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.50%	1.05%	+6.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.50%	1.05%	+6.45%

FLAO vs. RBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLAO has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than RBIL's 0.17% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLAO vs. RBIL - Dividend Comparison

FLAO has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RBIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.60%.

Position	TTM	2025
FLAO AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Floor5 Apr/Oct ETF	0.00%	0.00%
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF	4.60%	3.65%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLAO and RBIL in my portfolio?

FLAO and RBIL have a correlation of -0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLAO or RBIL?

FLAO has higher volatility (0.32%) compared to RBIL (0.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLAO dropped -10.12% vs RBIL's -0.50%.

Which ETF is better, FLAO or RBIL?

On 1-year performance, RBIL leads with 4.57% vs 4.33% for FLAO. On fees, RBIL is cheaper at 0.17% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLAO or RBIL?

Over the 1-year period, RBIL has performed better with a 4.57% return vs 4.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLAO or RBIL?

RBIL is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for FLAO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FLAO or RBIL?

RBIL has the higher dividend yield at 4.60%, compared with 0.00% for FLAO.

What is the main difference between FLAO and RBIL?

FLAO is categorized as Defined Outcome, while RBIL is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Allianz and F/m. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FLAO and 0.17% for RBIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.01 vs 0.76), 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.