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

Performance

ILS vs. RISR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) and FolioBeyond Alternative Income and Interest Rate Hedge ETF (RISR). 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 lower than RISR's 2.78% return.


ILS

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

RISR

1D
0.14%
1M
-0.44%
YTD
2.78%
6M
3.60%
1Y
4.20%
3Y*
10.78%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ILS vs. RISR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between ILS and RISR is -0.08, 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 (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.08

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

-0.09

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. RISR — 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

RISR
RISR Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
RISR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2222
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RISR Sortino Ratio Rank: 2121
Sortino Ratio Rank
RISR Omega Ratio Rank: 2121
Omega Ratio Rank
RISR Calmar Ratio Rank: 3333
Calmar Ratio Rank
RISR Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
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. RISR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) and FolioBeyond Alternative Income and Interest Rate Hedge ETF (RISR). 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.


ILSRISRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+3.43

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.62

1.14

+0.48

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

13.93

1.62

+12.31

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

46.57

3.81

+42.77

ILS vs. RISR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ILS Sharpe Ratio is 2.79, which is higher than the RISR Sharpe Ratio of 0.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ILS and RISR, 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


ILSRISRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.79

0.78

+2.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.90

1.24

+0.66

Drawdowns

ILS vs. RISR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ILS drawdown since its inception was -1.56%, smaller than the maximum RISR drawdown of -14.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ILS and RISR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ILSRISRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-1.56%

-14.31%

+12.75%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.55%

-2.61%

+2.06%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.07%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.71%

+0.71%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.25%

-2.19%

+1.94%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.17%

1.11%

-0.94%

Volatility

ILS vs. RISR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) is 0.88%, while FolioBeyond Alternative Income and Interest Rate Hedge ETF (RISR) has a volatility of 1.27%. This indicates that ILS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RISR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ILSRISRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.88%

1.27%

-0.39%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.69%

4.09%

-2.40%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.77%

5.44%

-2.67%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.38%

11.85%

-8.47%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.38%

11.85%

-8.47%

ILS vs. RISR - Expense Ratio Comparison

ILS has a 1.58% expense ratio, which is higher than RISR's 1.13% expense ratio.


Dividends

ILS vs. RISR - Dividend Comparison

ILS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.09%, more than RISR's 5.93% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
ILS
Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF
8.09%6.06%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RISR
FolioBeyond Alternative Income and Interest Rate Hedge ETF
5.93%5.95%5.67%7.96%4.26%0.30%

Frequently Asked Questions


ILS and RISR have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RISR has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to ILS (0.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ILS dropped -1.56% vs RISR's -14.31%.

On 1-year performance, ILS leads with 7.67% vs 4.20% for RISR. On fees, RISR is cheaper at 1.13% per year. On volatility, ILS has been the lower-risk option at 0.88%. 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 4.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RISR is cheaper with a 1.13% expense ratio, compared with 1.58% for ILS.

ILS has the higher dividend yield at 8.09%, compared with 5.93% for RISR.

They also come from different issuers: Brookmont and FolioBeyond. Their fees differ too: 1.58% for ILS and 1.13% for RISR.

ILS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.79 vs 0.78), 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 RISR

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