ILS vs. BTCI
ILS (Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF) and BTCI (NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ILS is a Nontraditional Bonds fund actively managed by Brookmont, while BTCI is a Cryptocurrency fund actively managed by Neos. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, ILS returned 7.73% vs -40.21% for BTCI. Their -0.13 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. ILS charges 1.58%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for BTCI.
Performance
ILS vs. BTCI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ILS achieves a 3.50% return, which is significantly higher than BTCI's -25.73% return.
ILS
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- 0.94%
- 6M
- 3.09%
- YTD
- 3.50%
- 1Y
- 7.73%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 5.33%
BTCI
- 1D
- -2.39%
- 1M
- 2.51%
- 6M
- -23.02%
- YTD
- -25.73%
- 1Y
- -40.21%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -4.18%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $12.53M | $12.80M | $22.67M | |
| $399.48K | $496.64K | $647.74K |
ILS vs. BTCI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF | 3.50% | 3.54% |
BTCI NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF | -25.73% | 8.52% |
Correlation
The correlation between ILS and BTCI is -0.11, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.11 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2025 | -0.13 |
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
ILS vs. BTCI — Risk / Return Rank
ILS
BTCI
ILS vs. BTCI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) and NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF (BTCI). 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.
| ILS | BTCI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +4.22 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +6.82 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.74 | 0.83 | +0.91 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 14.14 | -0.87 | +15.01 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 53.08 | -1.36 | +54.44 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ILS vs. BTCI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ILS drawdown since its inception was -2.46%, smaller than the maximum BTCI drawdown of -48.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILS and BTCI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ILS | BTCI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.46% | -48.42% | +45.96% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.55% | -48.42% | +47.87% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -45.08% | +45.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.50% | -17.81% | +17.31% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.15% | 30.79% | -30.64% |
Volatility
ILS vs. BTCI - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) is 0.42%, while NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF (BTCI) has a volatility of 7.31%. This indicates that ILS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BTCI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ILS | BTCI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.42% | 7.31% | -6.89% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.47% | 30.70% | -29.23% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.46% | 40.00% | -37.54% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.65% | 39.67% | -36.02% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.65% | 39.67% | -36.02% |
ILS vs. BTCI - Expense Ratio Comparison
ILS has a 1.58% expense ratio, which is higher than BTCI's 0.99% expense ratio.
Dividends
ILS vs. BTCI - Dividend Comparison
ILS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.14%, less than BTCI's 41.26% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
BTCI NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF | 41.26% | 36.46% | 6.76% |
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF | 8.14% | 6.06% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ILS and BTCI 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.
BTCI has higher volatility (7.31%) compared to ILS (0.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ILS dropped -2.46% vs BTCI's -48.42%.
On 1-year performance, ILS leads with 7.73% vs -40.21% for BTCI. On fees, BTCI is cheaper at 0.99% per year. On volatility, ILS has been the lower-risk option at 0.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, ILS has performed better with a 7.73% return vs -40.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BTCI is cheaper with a 0.99% expense ratio, compared with 1.58% for ILS.
BTCI has the higher dividend yield at 41.26%, compared with 8.14% for ILS.
ILS is categorized as Nontraditional Bonds, while BTCI is Cryptocurrency. They also come from different issuers: Brookmont and Neos. Their fees differ too: 1.58% for ILS and 0.99% for BTCI.
ILS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.18 vs -1.05), 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 ILS and BTCI
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