FPAS vs. XHLF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FPAS (FPA Short Duration Government ETF) and XHLF (BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF) are both Government Bonds funds. FPAS is actively managed, while XHLF is passively managed. Over the past year, FPAS returned 3.02% vs 3.92% for XHLF. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FPAS charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for XHLF.

Performance

FPAS vs. XHLF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FPA Short Duration Government ETF (FPAS) and BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF (XHLF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FPAS achieves a -0.75% return, which is significantly lower than XHLF's 1.39% return.

FPAS

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: -0.21%
• YTD: -0.75%
• 6M: -0.62%
• 1Y: 3.02%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

XHLF

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.27%
• YTD: 1.39%
• 6M: 1.71%
• 1Y: 3.92%
• 3Y*: 4.62%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FPAS vs. XHLF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FPAS FPA Short Duration Government ETF	-0.75%	7.15%	-0.03%
XHLF BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF	1.39%	4.21%	0.73%

Correlation

The correlation between FPAS and XHLF is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.11
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 4, 2024	0.14

Return for Risk

FPAS vs. XHLF — Risk / Return Rank

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

FPAS

FPAS Risk / Return Rank: 26
FPAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
FPAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
FPAS Omega Ratio Rank: 25
FPAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 26
FPAS Martin Ratio Rank: 27

XHLF

XHLF Risk / Return Rank: 100
XHLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
XHLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
XHLF Omega Ratio Rank: 100
XHLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
XHLF Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

FPAS vs. XHLF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FPA Short Duration Government ETF (FPAS) and BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF (XHLF). 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.

	FPAS	XHLF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.93	12.43	-11.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.39	45.85	-44.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	11.75	-10.58
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.23	98.81	-97.58
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.71	670.31	-666.60
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FPAS vs. XHLF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FPAS Sharpe Ratio is 0.93, which is lower than the XHLF Sharpe Ratio of 12.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FPAS and XHLF, 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

	FPAS	XHLF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.93	12.43	-11.50
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.98	10.75	-9.77

Drawdowns

FPAS vs. XHLF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FPAS drawdown since its inception was -2.47%, which is greater than XHLF's maximum drawdown of -0.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FPAS and XHLF.

Drawdown Indicators

	FPAS	XHLF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.47%	-0.11%	-2.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.47%	-0.04%	-2.43%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-0.06%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.85%	0.00%	-1.85%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.67%	-0.00%	-0.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.82%	0.01%	+0.81%

Volatility

FPAS vs. XHLF - Volatility Comparison

FPA Short Duration Government ETF (FPAS) has a higher volatility of 1.10% compared to BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF (XHLF) at 0.08%. This indicates that FPAS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XHLF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FPAS	XHLF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.10%	0.08%	+1.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.24%	0.22%	+2.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.25%	0.32%	+2.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.09%	0.42%	+3.67%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.09%	0.42%	+3.67%

FPAS vs. XHLF - Expense Ratio Comparison

FPAS has a 0.09% expense ratio, which is higher than XHLF's 0.03% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FPAS vs. XHLF - Dividend Comparison

FPAS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.78%, more than XHLF's 3.85% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
FPAS FPA Short Duration Government ETF	4.78%	4.75%	0.68%	0.00%	0.00%
XHLF BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF	3.85%	3.98%	4.96%	4.50%	0.86%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FPAS and XHLF in my portfolio?

FPAS and XHLF have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FPAS or XHLF?

FPAS has higher volatility (1.10%) compared to XHLF (0.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FPAS dropped -2.47% vs XHLF's -0.11%.

Which ETF is better, FPAS or XHLF?

On 1-year performance, XHLF leads with 3.92% vs 3.02% for FPAS. On fees, XHLF is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, XHLF has been the lower-risk option at 0.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FPAS or XHLF?

Over the 1-year period, XHLF has performed better with a 3.92% return vs 3.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FPAS or XHLF?

XHLF is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.09% for FPAS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FPAS or XHLF?

FPAS has the higher dividend yield at 4.78%, compared with 3.85% for XHLF.

What is the main difference between FPAS and XHLF?

They also come from different issuers: FPA and BondBloxx. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for FPAS and 0.03% for XHLF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XHLF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (12.43 vs 0.93), 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.