PBTP vs. ASMH

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

PBTP (Invesco PureBeta 0-5 Yr US TIPS ETF) and ASMH (ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PBTP is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the ICE BofA U.S. Treasuries Inflation-Linked (0-5 Y), while ASMH is a Technology Equities fund tracking the ASML Holding NV Sponsored ADR. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, PBTP returned 3.62% vs 160.23% for ASMH. At a correlation of -0.19, they often move in opposite directions. PBTP charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for ASMH.

Performance

PBTP vs. ASMH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco PureBeta 0-5 Yr US TIPS ETF (PBTP) and ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF (ASMH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBTP achieves a 1.42% return, which is significantly lower than ASMH's 85.33% return.

PBTP

• 1D: -0.18%
• 1M: -0.30%
• YTD: 1.42%
• 6M: 1.44%
• 1Y: 3.62%
• 3Y*: 4.97%
• 5Y*: 3.22%
• 10Y*: —

ASMH

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 19.55%
• YTD: 85.33%
• 6M: 88.06%
• 1Y: 160.23%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PBTP vs. ASMH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PBTP Invesco PureBeta 0-5 Yr US TIPS ETF	1.42%	2.70%
ASMH ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF	85.33%	59.22%

Correlation

The correlation between PBTP and ASMH is -0.16, 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	-0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 23, 2025	-0.19

Return for Risk

PBTP vs. ASMH — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBTP

PBTP Risk / Return Rank: 82
PBTP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
PBTP Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
PBTP Omega Ratio Rank: 82
PBTP Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
PBTP Martin Ratio Rank: 86

ASMH

ASMH Risk / Return Rank: 93
ASMH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
ASMH Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
ASMH Omega Ratio Rank: 88
ASMH Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
ASMH Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

PBTP vs. ASMH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco PureBeta 0-5 Yr US TIPS ETF (PBTP) and ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF (ASMH). 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.

	PBTP	ASMH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.25	3.92	-1.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.46	4.19	-0.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.52	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.98	10.15	-5.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.63	26.20	-8.58

PBTP vs. ASMH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBTP Sharpe Ratio is 2.25, which is lower than the ASMH Sharpe Ratio of 3.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBTP and ASMH, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

PBTP vs. ASMH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBTP drawdown since its inception was -5.44%, smaller than the maximum ASMH drawdown of -15.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBTP and ASMH.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBTP	ASMH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.44%	-15.89%	+10.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.73%	-15.89%	+15.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-1.03%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-5.44%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.73%	0.00%	-0.73%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.75%	-4.18%	+3.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.21%	6.14%	-5.93%

Volatility

PBTP vs. ASMH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco PureBeta 0-5 Yr US TIPS ETF (PBTP) is 0.63%, while ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF (ASMH) has a volatility of 15.26%. This indicates that PBTP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ASMH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBTP	ASMH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.63%	15.26%	-14.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.17%	32.35%	-31.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.62%	41.23%	-39.61%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.85%	39.72%	-36.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.64%	39.72%	-37.08%

PBTP vs. ASMH - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBTP has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than ASMH's 0.19% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

PBTP vs. ASMH - Dividend Comparison

PBTP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.86%, more than ASMH's 1.51% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ASMH ASML Holding NV ADR Hedged ETF	1.51%	0.19%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PBTP Invesco PureBeta 0-5 Yr US TIPS ETF	5.86%	3.82%	2.59%	2.36%	5.33%	3.12%	1.25%	2.12%	2.33%	0.73%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PBTP and ASMH in my portfolio?

PBTP and ASMH have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PBTP or ASMH?

ASMH has higher volatility (15.26%) compared to PBTP (0.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBTP dropped -5.44% vs ASMH's -15.89%.

Which ETF is better, PBTP or ASMH?

On 1-year performance, ASMH leads with 160.23% vs 3.62% for PBTP. On fees, PBTP is cheaper at 0.07% per year. On volatility, PBTP has been the lower-risk option at 0.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBTP or ASMH?

Over the 1-year period, ASMH has performed better with a 160.23% return vs 3.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBTP or ASMH?

PBTP is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for ASMH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PBTP or ASMH?

PBTP has the higher dividend yield at 5.86%, compared with 1.51% for ASMH.

What is the main difference between PBTP and ASMH?

PBTP is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while ASMH is Technology Equities. PBTP tracks ICE BofA U.S. Treasuries Inflation-Linked (0-5 Y), while ASMH tracks ASML Holding NV Sponsored ADR. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Precidian Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for PBTP and 0.19% for ASMH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ASMH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.92 vs 2.25), 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.