MBSF vs. ILS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MBSF (Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF) and ILS (Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MBSF is a Bank Loan fund actively managed by Regan, while ILS is a Nontraditional Bonds fund actively managed by Brookmont. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MBSF returned 5.34% vs 7.67% for ILS. At a correlation of -0.10, they often move in opposite directions. MBSF charges 0.49%/yr vs 1.58%/yr for ILS.

Performance

MBSF vs. ILS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF (MBSF) and Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MBSF achieves a 1.48% return, which is significantly lower than ILS's 1.81% return.

MBSF

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

ILS

• 1D: 0.05%
• 1M: 0.45%
• YTD: 1.81%
• 6M: 2.12%
• 1Y: 7.67%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MBSF vs. ILS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MBSF Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF	1.48%	4.42%
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	1.81%	5.60%

Correlation

The correlation between MBSF and ILS is -0.12, 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	-0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2025	-0.10

Return for Risk

MBSF vs. ILS — Risk / Return Rank

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

MBSF

MBSF Risk / Return Rank: 70
MBSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
MBSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
MBSF Omega Ratio Rank: 55
MBSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
MBSF Martin Ratio Rank: 88

ILS

ILS Risk / Return Rank: 93
ILS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
ILS Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
ILS Omega Ratio Rank: 92
ILS Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
ILS Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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. ILS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF (MBSF) and Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS). 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.

	MBSF	ILS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.79	2.79	-1.00
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.77	4.56	-1.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.62	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.77	13.93	-7.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.20	46.57	-27.37
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MBSF vs. ILS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MBSF Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is lower than the ILS Sharpe Ratio of 2.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MBSF and ILS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MBSF	ILS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.79	2.79	-1.00
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.74	1.90	-0.16

Drawdowns

MBSF vs. ILS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MBSF drawdown since its inception was -0.97%, smaller than the maximum ILS drawdown of -1.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MBSF and ILS.

Drawdown Indicators

	MBSF	ILS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.97%	-1.56%	+0.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.79%	-0.55%	-0.24%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.10%	0.00%	-0.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.23%	-0.25%	+0.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.28%	0.17%	+0.11%

Volatility

MBSF vs. ILS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF (MBSF) is 0.64%, while Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) has a volatility of 0.88%. This indicates that MBSF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ILS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MBSF	ILS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.64%	0.88%	-0.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.16%	1.69%	+0.47%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.01%	2.77%	+0.24%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.34%	3.38%	-0.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.34%	3.38%	-0.04%

MBSF vs. ILS - Expense Ratio Comparison

MBSF has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than ILS's 1.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

MBSF vs. ILS - Dividend Comparison

MBSF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.49%, less than ILS's 8.09% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	8.09%	6.06%	0.00%
MBSF Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF	4.49%	4.71%	4.14%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MBSF and ILS in my portfolio?

MBSF and ILS have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MBSF or ILS?

ILS has higher volatility (0.88%) compared to MBSF (0.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MBSF dropped -0.97% vs ILS's -1.56%.

Which ETF is better, MBSF or ILS?

On 1-year performance, ILS leads with 7.67% vs 5.34% for MBSF. On fees, MBSF is cheaper at 0.49% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, MBSF or ILS?

Over the 1-year period, ILS has performed better with a 7.67% return vs 5.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MBSF or ILS?

MBSF is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 1.58% for ILS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MBSF or ILS?

ILS has the higher dividend yield at 8.09%, compared with 4.49% for MBSF.

What is the main difference between MBSF and ILS?

MBSF is categorized as Bank Loan, while ILS is Nontraditional Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Regan and Brookmont. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for MBSF and 1.58% for ILS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ILS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.79 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.