PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ISMF vs. XBIL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ISMF vs. XBIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Managed Futures Active ETF (ISMF) and US Treasury 6 Month Bill ETF (XBIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

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

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

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

ISMF
ISMF Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
ISMF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ISMF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
ISMF Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
ISMF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
ISMF Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank

XBIL
XBIL Risk / Return Rank: 100100
Overall Rank
XBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 100100
Sortino Ratio Rank
XBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 100100
Omega Ratio Rank
XBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 100100
Calmar Ratio Rank
XBIL Martin Ratio Rank: 100100
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.

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.


ISMFXBILDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.71

13.50

-10.79

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.69

52.26

-48.57

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.57

12.94

-11.37

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

5.46

98.95

-93.49

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

18.89

780.34

-761.46

ISMF vs. XBIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ISMF Sharpe Ratio is 2.71, which is lower than the XBIL Sharpe Ratio of 13.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ISMF and XBIL, 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


ISMFXBILDifference

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


ISMFXBILDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest 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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.81%

0.00%

-0.81%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.28%

-0.00%

-1.28%

Ulcer Index

Depth 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


ISMFXBILDifference

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.


PositionTTM202520242023
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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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