PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ILS vs. MARB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ILS vs. MARB - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ILS achieves a 1.81% return, which is significantly higher than MARB's 1.26% return.


ILS

1D
0.05%
1M
0.45%
YTD
1.81%
6M
2.12%
1Y
7.67%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

MARB

1D
0.05%
1M
0.22%
YTD
1.26%
6M
1.42%
1Y
6.18%
3Y*
4.29%
5Y*
2.64%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ILS vs. MARB - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between ILS and MARB is -0.17, 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

-0.17

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2025

-0.11

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. MARB — Risk / Return Rank

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

ILS
ILS Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
ILS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ILS Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
ILS Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
ILS Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
ILS Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
Martin Ratio Rank

MARB
MARB Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
MARB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3232
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MARB Sortino Ratio Rank: 3434
Sortino Ratio Rank
MARB Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
MARB Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
MARB Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank
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. MARB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) and First Trust Merger Arbitrage ETF (MARB). 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.


ILSMARBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.62

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.76

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.62

1.32

+0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

13.93

2.56

+11.37

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

46.57

20.98

+25.59

ILS vs. MARB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ILS Sharpe Ratio is 2.79, which is higher than the MARB Sharpe Ratio of 1.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ILS and MARB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ILSMARBDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.79

1.17

+1.62

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.62

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.90

0.36

+1.54

Drawdowns

ILS vs. MARB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ILS drawdown since its inception was -1.56%, smaller than the maximum MARB drawdown of -11.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILS and MARB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ILSMARBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-1.56%

-11.99%

+10.43%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.55%

-2.43%

+1.88%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-3.67%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-3.67%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.25%

-1.40%

+1.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.17%

0.30%

-0.13%

Volatility

ILS vs. MARB - Volatility Comparison

Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) has a higher volatility of 0.88% compared to First Trust Merger Arbitrage ETF (MARB) at 0.47%. This indicates that ILS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MARB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ILSMARBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.88%

0.47%

+0.41%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.69%

2.18%

-0.49%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.77%

5.31%

-2.54%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.38%

4.27%

-0.89%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.38%

5.60%

-2.22%

ILS vs. MARB - Expense Ratio Comparison

ILS has a 1.58% expense ratio, which is lower than MARB's 2.30% expense ratio.


Dividends

ILS vs. MARB - Dividend Comparison

ILS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.09%, more than MARB's 2.98% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
ILS
Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF
8.09%6.06%0.00%0.00%0.00%
MARB
First Trust Merger Arbitrage ETF
2.98%3.01%2.11%2.20%0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions


ILS and MARB have a correlation of -0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ILS has higher volatility (0.88%) compared to MARB (0.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ILS dropped -1.56% vs MARB's -11.99%.

On 1-year performance, ILS leads with 7.67% vs 6.18% for MARB. On fees, ILS is cheaper at 1.58% per year. On volatility, MARB has been the lower-risk option at 0.47%. 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 7.67% return vs 6.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ILS is cheaper with a 1.58% expense ratio, compared with 2.30% for MARB.

ILS has the higher dividend yield at 8.09%, compared with 2.98% for MARB.

ILS is categorized as Nontraditional Bonds, while MARB is Long-Short. They also come from different issuers: Brookmont and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 1.58% for ILS and 2.30% for MARB.

ILS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.79 vs 1.17), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ILS and MARB

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