GBTC vs. ILS

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

GBTC (Grayscale Bitcoin Trust ETF) and ILS (Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GBTC is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the CoinDesk Bitcoin Benchmark Rate Index, while ILS is a Nontraditional Bonds fund actively managed by Brookmont. GBTC is passively managed, while ILS is actively managed. Over the past year, GBTC returned -44.89% vs 7.63% for ILS. Their -0.12 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. GBTC charges 1.50%/yr vs 1.58%/yr for ILS.

Performance

GBTC vs. ILS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Grayscale Bitcoin Trust ETF (GBTC) and Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GBTC achieves a -27.25% return, which is significantly lower than ILS's 3.55% return.

GBTC

• 1D: 0.61%
• 1M: 4.39%
• 6M: -16.57%
• YTD: -27.25%
• 1Y: -44.89%
• 3Y*: 37.28%
• 5Y*: 8.08%
• 10Y*: 49.90%
• ALL TIME*: 54.71%

ILS

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.99%
• 6M: 3.21%
• YTD: 3.55%
• 1Y: 7.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 5.33%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
GBTC Grayscale Bitcoin Trust ETF	$77.84M	$75.78M	$100.19M
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	$448.54K	$510.06K	$623.45K

GBTC vs. ILS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
GBTC Grayscale Bitcoin Trust ETF	-27.25%	4.89%
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	3.55%	3.54%

Correlation

The correlation between GBTC and ILS is -0.10, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2025	-0.12

Return for Risk

GBTC vs. ILS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

GBTC

GBTC Risk / Return Rank: 2
GBTC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
GBTC Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
GBTC Omega Ratio Rank: 2
GBTC Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
GBTC Martin Ratio Rank: 2

ILS

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

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

GBTC vs. ILS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Grayscale Bitcoin Trust ETF (GBTC) and Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS). 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.

	GBTC	ILS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.02	3.11	-4.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.51	5.19	-6.70
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.83	1.72	-0.89
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.84	13.85	-14.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.28	51.98	-53.26

GBTC vs. ILS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GBTC Sharpe Ratio is -1.02, which is lower than the ILS Sharpe Ratio of 3.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GBTC and ILS, 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

GBTC vs. ILS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GBTC drawdown since its inception was -89.91%, which is greater than ILS's maximum drawdown of -2.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GBTC and ILS.

Drawdown Indicators

	GBTC	ILS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-89.91%	-2.46%	-87.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-53.75%	-0.55%	-53.20%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-53.75%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-85.42%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-89.91%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-49.48%	0.00%	-49.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-43.52%	-0.50%	-43.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	35.20%	0.15%	+35.05%

Volatility

GBTC vs. ILS - Volatility Comparison

Grayscale Bitcoin Trust ETF (GBTC) has a higher volatility of 8.10% compared to Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) at 0.41%. This indicates that GBTC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ILS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GBTC	ILS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.10%	0.41%	+7.69%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	32.98%	1.46%	+31.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	44.30%	2.46%	+41.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	60.53%	3.64%	+56.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	81.15%	3.64%	+77.51%

GBTC vs. ILS - Expense Ratio Comparison

GBTC has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is lower than ILS's 1.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

GBTC vs. ILS - Dividend Comparison

GBTC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ILS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.13%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GBTC Grayscale Bitcoin Trust ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	5.61%
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	8.13%	6.06%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GBTC and ILS in my portfolio?

GBTC and ILS have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GBTC or ILS?

GBTC has higher volatility (8.10%) compared to ILS (0.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GBTC dropped -89.91% vs ILS's -2.46%.

Which ETF is better, GBTC or ILS?

On 1-year performance, ILS leads with 7.63% vs -44.89% for GBTC. On fees, GBTC is cheaper at 1.50% per year. On volatility, ILS has been the lower-risk option at 0.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GBTC or ILS?

Over the 1-year period, ILS has performed better with a 7.63% return vs -44.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GBTC or ILS?

GBTC is cheaper with a 1.50% expense ratio, compared with 1.58% for ILS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GBTC or ILS?

ILS has the higher dividend yield at 8.13%, compared with 0.00% for GBTC.

What is the main difference between GBTC and ILS?

GBTC is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while ILS is Nontraditional Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Grayscale and Brookmont. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for GBTC and 1.58% for ILS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ILS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.11 vs -1.02), 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.