ISVBF vs. BIL
ISVBF (iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF) and BIL (SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ISVBF is a China Equities fund tracking the MSCI China A Inclusion Index, while BIL is a Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg 1-3 Month U.S. Treasury Bill Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ISVBF returned -5.16%/yr vs 3.41%/yr for BIL. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. ISVBF charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for BIL.
Performance
ISVBF vs. BIL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ISVBF achieves a -6.46% return, which is significantly lower than BIL's 1.49% return.
ISVBF
- 1D
- -2.03%
- 1M
- -2.58%
- YTD
- -6.46%
- 6M
- -7.93%
- 1Y
- 7.29%
- 3Y*
- 9.94%
- 5Y*
- -5.16%
- 10Y*
- —
BIL
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.28%
- YTD
- 1.49%
- 6M
- 1.77%
- 1Y
- 3.87%
- 3Y*
- 4.64%
- 5Y*
- 3.41%
- 10Y*
- 2.18%
ISVBF vs. BIL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | -6.46% | 30.64% | 18.96% | -9.28% | -23.01% | -22.12% |
BIL SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF | 1.49% | 4.15% | 5.19% | 4.94% | 1.40% | -0.08% |
Correlation
The correlation between ISVBF and BIL 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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.03 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.04 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 6, 2021 | -0.04 |
The correlation between ISVBF and BIL shifts across timeframes, from -0.17 (1 year) to -0.03 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
ISVBF vs. BIL — Risk / Return Rank
ISVBF
BIL
ISVBF vs. BIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) and SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF (BIL). 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.
| ISVBF | BIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -19.47 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -173.62 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 87.91 | -86.84 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.38 | 355.35 | -354.97 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.89 | 2,817.77 | -2,816.88 |
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
| ISVBF | BIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.24 | 19.71 | -19.47 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.17 | 13.16 | -13.33 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 8.52 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.15 | 2.78 | -2.93 |
Drawdowns
ISVBF vs. BIL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ISVBF drawdown since its inception was -53.78%, which is greater than BIL's maximum drawdown of -0.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISVBF and BIL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ISVBF | BIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -53.78% | -0.78% | -53.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.18% | -0.01% | -19.17% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.77% | -0.01% | -23.76% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -53.22% | -0.10% | -53.12% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -0.21% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -24.18% | 0.00% | -24.18% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -32.76% | -0.26% | -32.50% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 8.21% | 0.00% | +8.21% |
Volatility
ISVBF vs. BIL - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) has a higher volatility of 10.81% compared to SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF (BIL) at 0.05%. This indicates that ISVBF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ISVBF | BIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.81% | 0.05% | +10.76% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 26.55% | 0.13% | +26.42% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 30.57% | 0.20% | +30.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.20% | 0.26% | +29.94% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.21% | 0.26% | +29.95% |
ISVBF vs. BIL - Expense Ratio Comparison
ISVBF has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than BIL's 0.14% expense ratio.
Dividends
ISVBF vs. BIL - Dividend Comparison
ISVBF has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.86%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BIL SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF | 3.86% | 4.13% | 5.03% | 4.92% | 1.35% | 0.00% | 0.30% | 2.05% | 1.66% | 0.68% | 0.07% |
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ISVBF and BIL 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.
ISVBF has higher volatility (10.81%) compared to BIL (0.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISVBF dropped -53.78% vs BIL's -0.78%.
On 5-year performance, BIL leads with 3.41% vs -5.16% for ISVBF. On fees, BIL is cheaper at 0.14% per year. On volatility, BIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, BIL has performed better with a 3.41% return vs -5.16%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BIL is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for ISVBF.
BIL has the higher dividend yield at 3.86%, compared with 0.00% for ISVBF.
ISVBF is categorized as China Equities, while BIL is Government Bonds. ISVBF tracks MSCI China A Inclusion Index, while BIL tracks Bloomberg 1-3 Month U.S. Treasury Bill Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for ISVBF and 0.14% for BIL.
BIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (19.71 vs 0.24), 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 ISVBF and BIL
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