ISMF vs. XBIL
ISMF (iShares Managed Futures Active ETF) and XBIL (US Treasury 6 Month Bill ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ISMF is a Systematic Trend fund actively managed by iShares, while XBIL is a Ultrashort Bond fund tracking the ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index - Benchmark TR Gross. ISMF is actively managed, while XBIL is passively managed. Over the past year, ISMF returned 21.28% vs 3.92% for XBIL. At a correlation of -0.19, they often move in opposite directions. ISMF charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for XBIL.
Performance
ISMF vs. XBIL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ISMF achieves a 7.48% return, which is significantly higher than XBIL's 1.42% return.
ISMF
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- 0.89%
- YTD
- 7.48%
- 6M
- 10.36%
- 1Y
- 21.28%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XBIL
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 0.26%
- YTD
- 1.42%
- 6M
- 1.76%
- 1Y
- 3.92%
- 3Y*
- 4.67%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ISMF vs. XBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ISMF iShares Managed Futures Active ETF | 7.48% | 11.58% |
XBIL US Treasury 6 Month Bill ETF | 1.42% | 3.34% |
Correlation
The correlation between ISMF and XBIL 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 Mar 14, 2025 | -0.19 |
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
ISMF vs. XBIL — Risk / Return Rank
ISMF
XBIL
ISMF vs. XBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Managed Futures Active ETF (ISMF) and US Treasury 6 Month Bill ETF (XBIL). 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.
| ISMF | XBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.71 | 13.50 | -10.79 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.69 | 52.26 | -48.57 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.57 | 12.94 | -11.37 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.46 | 98.95 | -93.49 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 18.89 | 780.34 | -761.46 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ISMF | XBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.71 | 13.50 | -10.79 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.08 | 12.48 | -10.40 |
Drawdowns
ISMF vs. XBIL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ISMF drawdown since its inception was -4.23%, which is greater than XBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISMF and XBIL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ISMF | XBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.23% | -0.08% | -4.15% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.94% | -0.04% | -3.90% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -0.07% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.81% | 0.00% | -0.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.28% | -0.00% | -1.28% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.14% | 0.01% | +1.13% |
Volatility
ISMF vs. XBIL - Volatility Comparison
iShares Managed Futures Active ETF (ISMF) has a higher volatility of 1.72% compared to US Treasury 6 Month Bill ETF (XBIL) at 0.09%. This indicates that ISMF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XBIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ISMF | XBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.72% | 0.09% | +1.63% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.29% | 0.18% | +6.11% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.88% | 0.29% | +7.59% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.76% | 0.37% | +7.39% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.76% | 0.37% | +7.39% |
ISMF vs. XBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison
ISMF has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than XBIL's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
ISMF vs. XBIL - Dividend Comparison
ISMF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.80%, more than XBIL's 3.77% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
ISMF iShares Managed Futures Active ETF | 5.80% | 6.23% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XBIL US Treasury 6 Month Bill ETF | 3.77% | 4.01% | 4.90% | 4.30% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ISMF and XBIL 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.
ISMF has higher volatility (1.72%) compared to XBIL (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISMF dropped -4.23% vs XBIL's -0.08%.
On 1-year performance, ISMF leads with 21.28% vs 3.92% for XBIL. On fees, XBIL is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, XBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, ISMF has performed better with a 21.28% return vs 3.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XBIL is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for ISMF.
ISMF has the higher dividend yield at 5.80%, compared with 3.77% for XBIL.
ISMF is categorized as Systematic Trend, while XBIL is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: iShares and US Benchmark Series. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for ISMF and 0.15% for XBIL.
XBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (13.50 vs 2.71), 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 ISMF and XBIL
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