ILS vs. GLDB

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

ILS (Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF) and GLDB (Strategy Shares Gold-Hedged Bond ETF) are both Nontraditional Bonds funds. ILS is actively managed, while GLDB is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.09, they often move in opposite directions. ILS charges 1.58%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for GLDB.

Performance

ILS vs. GLDB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) and Strategy Shares Gold-Hedged Bond ETF (GLDB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ILS achieves a 2.17% return, which is significantly higher than GLDB's -15.33% return.

ILS

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: 1.16%
• YTD: 2.17%
• 6M: 2.46%
• 1Y: 7.46%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GLDB

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: -13.50%
• YTD: -15.33%
• 6M: -16.66%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ILS vs. GLDB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	2.17%	0.83%
GLDB Strategy Shares Gold-Hedged Bond ETF	-15.33%	-3.56%

Correlation

The correlation between ILS and GLDB is -0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 24, 2025	-0.09

Return for Risk

ILS vs. GLDB — Risk / Return Rank

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

ILS

ILS Risk / Return Rank: 95
ILS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
ILS Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
ILS Omega Ratio Rank: 94
ILS Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
ILS Martin Ratio Rank: 98

GLDB

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

ILS vs. GLDB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) and Strategy Shares Gold-Hedged Bond ETF (GLDB). 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	GLDB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.91	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.78	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.65	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	13.55	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	49.81	—	—

Drawdowns

ILS vs. GLDB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ILS drawdown since its inception was -2.46%, smaller than the maximum GLDB drawdown of -33.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILS and GLDB.

Drawdown Indicators

	ILS	GLDB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.46%	-33.45%	+30.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.55%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-32.62%	+32.62%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.54%	-14.64%	+14.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.15%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ILS	GLDB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.83%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.68%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.58%	40.03%	-37.45%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.78%	40.03%	-36.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.78%	40.03%	-36.25%

ILS vs. GLDB - Expense Ratio Comparison

ILS has a 1.58% expense ratio, which is higher than GLDB's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

ILS vs. GLDB - Dividend Comparison

ILS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.06%, more than GLDB's 0.23% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
GLDB Strategy Shares Gold-Hedged Bond ETF	0.23%	0.19%
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	8.06%	6.06%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ILS and GLDB in my portfolio?

ILS and GLDB have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ILS or GLDB?

On fees, GLDB is cheaper at 0.79% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ILS or GLDB?

GLDB is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 1.58% for ILS.

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

ILS has the higher dividend yield at 8.06%, compared with 0.23% for GLDB.

What is the main difference between ILS and GLDB?

They also come from different issuers: Brookmont and Strategy Shares. Their fees differ too: 1.58% for ILS and 0.79% for GLDB.