PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MBSF vs. BINC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MBSF vs. BINC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF (MBSF) and iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MBSF achieves a 1.48% return, which is significantly higher than BINC's 0.90% return.


MBSF

1D
0.12%
1M
-0.03%
YTD
1.48%
6M
2.16%
1Y
5.34%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BINC

1D
-0.12%
1M
0.54%
YTD
0.90%
6M
1.22%
1Y
5.80%
3Y*
7.02%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MBSF vs. BINC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
MBSF
Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF
1.48%5.85%5.71%
BINC
iShares Flexible Income Active ETF
0.90%7.57%5.70%

Correlation

The correlation between MBSF and BINC is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.15

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 29, 2024

0.15

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

MBSF vs. BINC — Risk / Return Rank

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

MBSF
MBSF Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
MBSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MBSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
MBSF Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
MBSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
MBSF Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank

BINC
BINC Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
BINC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BINC Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
BINC Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
BINC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
BINC Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
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.

MBSF vs. BINC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF (MBSF) and iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC). 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.


MBSFBINCDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.79

2.56

-0.77

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.77

3.71

-0.94

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.51

-0.18

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

6.77

2.17

+4.61

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

19.20

8.53

+10.67

MBSF vs. BINC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MBSF Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is comparable to the BINC Sharpe Ratio of 2.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MBSF and BINC, 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


MBSFBINCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.79

2.56

-0.77

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.74

2.36

-0.62

Drawdowns

MBSF vs. BINC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MBSF drawdown since its inception was -0.97%, smaller than the maximum BINC drawdown of -2.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MBSF and BINC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MBSFBINCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-0.97%

-2.69%

+1.72%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.79%

-2.69%

+1.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-2.69%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.10%

-0.49%

+0.39%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.23%

-0.36%

+0.13%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.28%

0.68%

-0.40%

Volatility

MBSF vs. BINC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF (MBSF) is 0.64%, while iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) has a volatility of 0.75%. This indicates that MBSF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BINC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MBSFBINCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.64%

0.75%

-0.11%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.16%

1.84%

+0.32%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.01%

2.28%

+0.73%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.34%

3.00%

+0.34%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.34%

3.00%

+0.34%

MBSF vs. BINC - Expense Ratio Comparison

MBSF has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than BINC's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

MBSF vs. BINC - Dividend Comparison

MBSF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.49%, less than BINC's 5.86% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
BINC
iShares Flexible Income Active ETF
5.86%5.86%6.14%3.13%
MBSF
Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF
4.49%4.71%4.14%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


MBSF and BINC have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BINC has higher volatility (0.75%) compared to MBSF (0.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MBSF dropped -0.97% vs BINC's -2.69%.

On 1-year performance, BINC leads with 5.80% vs 5.34% for MBSF. On fees, BINC is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, MBSF has been the lower-risk option at 0.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BINC has performed better with a 5.80% return vs 5.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BINC is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for MBSF.

BINC has the higher dividend yield at 5.86%, compared with 4.49% for MBSF.

MBSF is categorized as Bank Loan, while BINC is Multisector Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Regan and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for MBSF and 0.40% for BINC.

BINC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.56 vs 1.79), 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 MBSF and BINC

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