PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RAA vs. BIL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RAA vs. BIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF (RAA) and SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF (BIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RAA achieves a 8.82% return, which is significantly higher than BIL's 1.66% return.


RAA

1D
-0.16%
1M
-0.64%
YTD
8.82%
6M
8.51%
1Y
21.28%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BIL

1D
0.00%
1M
0.27%
YTD
1.66%
6M
1.75%
1Y
3.85%
3Y*
4.60%
5Y*
3.45%
10Y*
2.20%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RAA vs. BIL - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between RAA and BIL is -0.05, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

-0.05

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 26, 2025

-0.05

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

RAA vs. BIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

RAA
RAA Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
RAA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RAA Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
RAA Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
RAA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
RAA Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank

BIL
BIL Risk / Return Rank: 100100
Overall Rank
BIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 100100
Sortino Ratio Rank
BIL Omega Ratio Rank: 100100
Omega Ratio Rank
BIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 100100
Calmar Ratio Rank
BIL Martin Ratio Rank: 100100
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.

RAA vs. BIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF (RAA) 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.


RAABILDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-17.25

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-170.30

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

87.41

-86.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.62

353.28

-349.67

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.63

2,801.35

-2,787.72

RAA vs. BIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RAA Sharpe Ratio is 2.12, which is lower than the BIL Sharpe Ratio of 19.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RAA and BIL, 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...

Drawdowns

RAA vs. BIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RAA drawdown since its inception was -11.96%, which is greater than BIL's maximum drawdown of -0.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RAA and BIL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RAABILDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.96%

-0.78%

-11.18%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.91%

-0.01%

-5.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-0.01%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-0.09%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-0.21%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.39%

0.00%

-2.39%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.48%

-0.26%

-1.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.56%

0.00%

+1.56%

Volatility

RAA vs. BIL - Volatility Comparison

SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF (RAA) has a higher volatility of 3.90% compared to SPDR Bloomberg 1-3 Month T-Bill ETF (BIL) at 0.07%. This indicates that RAA'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


RAABILDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.90%

0.07%

+3.83%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.18%

0.14%

+8.04%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.11%

0.20%

+9.91%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.86%

0.26%

+12.60%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.86%

0.26%

+12.60%

RAA vs. BIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

RAA has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than BIL's 0.14% expense ratio.


Dividends

RAA vs. BIL - Dividend Comparison

RAA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.11%, less than BIL's 3.85% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
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%
RAA
SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF
2.11%2.14%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


RAA and BIL have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RAA has higher volatility (3.90%) compared to BIL (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RAA dropped -11.96% vs BIL's -0.78%.

On 1-year performance, RAA leads with 21.28% vs 3.85% for BIL. 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 1-year period, RAA has performed better with a 21.28% return vs 3.85%. 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 0.85% for RAA.

BIL has the higher dividend yield at 3.85%, compared with 2.11% for RAA.

RAA is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while BIL is Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: SMI Advisory Services and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for RAA and 0.14% for BIL.

BIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (19.37 vs 2.12), 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 RAA 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