FLJP vs. RBIL

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FLJP (Franklin FTSE Japan ETF) and RBIL (F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLJP is a Japan Equities fund tracking the FTSE Japan RIC Capped Index, while RBIL is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FLJP returned 33.85% vs 4.07% for RBIL. At a correlation of -0.18, they often move in opposite directions. FLJP charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for RBIL.

Performance

FLJP vs. RBIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin FTSE Japan ETF (FLJP) 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, FLJP achieves a 15.09% return, which is significantly higher than RBIL's 2.32% return.

FLJP

• 1D: -4.00%
• 1M: 1.04%
• YTD: 15.09%
• 6M: 14.43%
• 1Y: 33.85%
• 3Y*: 18.60%
• 5Y*: 9.15%
• 10Y*: —

RBIL

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: -0.19%
• YTD: 2.32%
• 6M: 2.37%
• 1Y: 4.07%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FLJP vs. RBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FLJP Franklin FTSE Japan ETF	15.09%	23.89%
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF	2.32%	2.85%

Correlation

The correlation between FLJP and RBIL is -0.21, 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	-0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2025	-0.18

Return for Risk

FLJP vs. RBIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLJP

FLJP Risk / Return Rank: 53
FLJP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
FLJP Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
FLJP Omega Ratio Rank: 53
FLJP Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
FLJP Martin Ratio Rank: 53

RBIL

RBIL Risk / Return Rank: 97
RBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
RBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
RBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 98
RBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
RBIL Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

FLJP vs. RBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin FTSE Japan ETF (FLJP) 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.

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.

	FLJP	RBIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.71	4.35	-2.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.40	6.69	-4.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	2.13	-0.81
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.56	7.82	-5.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.86	42.95	-34.09

FLJP vs. RBIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLJP Sharpe Ratio is 1.71, which is lower than the RBIL Sharpe Ratio of 4.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLJP 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.

Drawdowns

FLJP vs. RBIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLJP drawdown since its inception was -32.49%, which is greater than RBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLJP and RBIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLJP	RBIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.49%	-0.52%	-31.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.30%	-0.52%	-12.78%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.17%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-32.49%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.00%	-0.50%	-3.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.32%	-0.07%	-9.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.83%	0.10%	+3.73%

Volatility

FLJP vs. RBIL - Volatility Comparison

Franklin FTSE Japan ETF (FLJP) has a higher volatility of 7.16% compared to F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) at 0.36%. This indicates that FLJP'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

	FLJP	RBIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.16%	0.36%	+6.80%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.00%	0.85%	+15.15%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.84%	0.95%	+18.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.95%	1.07%	+16.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.88%	1.07%	+16.81%

FLJP vs. RBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLJP has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is lower than RBIL's 0.17% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FLJP vs. RBIL - Dividend Comparison

FLJP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.83%, less than RBIL's 4.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLJP Franklin FTSE Japan ETF	3.83%	5.15%	4.56%	3.00%	1.92%	2.40%	1.51%	2.26%	1.50%	0.10%
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF	4.38%	3.65%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLJP and RBIL in my portfolio?

FLJP and RBIL have a correlation of -0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLJP or RBIL?

FLJP has higher volatility (7.16%) compared to RBIL (0.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLJP dropped -32.49% vs RBIL's -0.52%.

Which ETF is better, FLJP or RBIL?

On 1-year performance, FLJP leads with 33.85% vs 4.07% for RBIL. On fees, FLJP is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, RBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLJP or RBIL?

Over the 1-year period, FLJP has performed better with a 33.85% return vs 4.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLJP or RBIL?

FLJP is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.17% for RBIL.

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

RBIL has the higher dividend yield at 4.38%, compared with 3.83% for FLJP.

What is the main difference between FLJP and RBIL?

FLJP is categorized as Japan Equities, while RBIL is Inflation-Protected Bonds. FLJP tracks FTSE Japan RIC Capped Index, while RBIL tracks Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and F/m. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for FLJP and 0.17% for RBIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.35 vs 1.71), 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.