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 -6.16%/yr vs 3.45%/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 -12.61% return, which is significantly lower than BIL's 1.67% return.
ISVBF
- 1D
- -1.91%
- 1M
- -3.63%
- YTD
- -12.61%
- 6M
- -13.33%
- 1Y
- -0.84%
- 3Y*
- 8.82%
- 5Y*
- -6.16%
- 10Y*
- —
BIL
- 1D
- 0.01%
- 1M
- 0.28%
- YTD
- 1.67%
- 6M
- 1.76%
- 1Y
- 3.84%
- 3Y*
- 4.60%
- 5Y*
- 3.45%
- 10Y*
- 2.20%
ISVBF vs. BIL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ISVBF iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF | -12.61% | 30.64% | 18.96% | -9.28% | -23.01% | -22.12% |
BIL SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF | 1.67% | 4.15% | 5.19% | 4.94% | 1.40% | -0.07% |
Correlation
The correlation between ISVBF and BIL is -0.14, 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 | -0.14 |
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 5, 2021 | -0.04 |
The correlation between ISVBF and BIL shifts across timeframes, from -0.14 (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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| ISVBF | BIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -19.35 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -172.49 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.02 | 87.16 | -86.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.04 | 352.24 | -352.28 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.09 | 2,793.11 | -2,793.20 |
Loading charts...
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 | -20.64% | -0.01% | -20.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.77% | -0.01% | -23.76% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -52.51% | -0.09% | -52.42% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -0.21% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -29.16% | 0.00% | -29.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -32.68% | -0.26% | -32.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.17% | 0.00% | +9.17% |
Volatility
ISVBF vs. BIL - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI China A UCITS ETF (ISVBF) has a higher volatility of 8.35% compared to SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF (BIL) at 0.07%. 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 | 8.35% | 0.07% | +8.28% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 27.04% | 0.14% | +26.90% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 30.91% | 0.20% | +30.71% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 30.31% | 0.26% | +30.05% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.15% | 0.26% | +29.89% |
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 3.85%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BIL SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF | 3.85% | 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 -0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ISVBF has higher volatility (8.35%) compared to BIL (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISVBF dropped -53.78% vs BIL's -0.78%.
On 5-year performance, BIL leads with 3.45% vs -6.16% for ISVBF. On fees, BIL is cheaper at 0.14% per year. On volatility, BIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.07%. 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 3.45% return vs -6.16%. 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 3.85%, 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 (19.32 vs -0.03), 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