RBIL vs. AQLT
RBIL (F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF) and AQLT (iShares MSCI Global Quality Factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RBIL is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index, while AQLT is a Global Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Quality Index (Net). Both are passively managed. Over the past year, RBIL returned 4.57% vs 29.00% for AQLT. At a correlation of -0.26, they often move in opposite directions. RBIL charges 0.17%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for AQLT.
Performance
RBIL vs. AQLT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RBIL achieves a 2.70% return, which is significantly lower than AQLT's 12.40% return.
RBIL
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- 0.38%
- YTD
- 2.70%
- 6M
- 2.79%
- 1Y
- 4.57%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AQLT
- 1D
- -0.37%
- 1M
- 4.34%
- YTD
- 12.40%
- 6M
- 12.67%
- 1Y
- 29.00%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RBIL vs. AQLT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF | 2.70% | 2.91% |
AQLT iShares MSCI Global Quality Factor ETF | 12.40% | 14.18% |
Correlation
The correlation between RBIL and AQLT is -0.32, 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 | -0.32 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 26, 2025 | -0.26 |
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
RBIL vs. AQLT — Risk / Return Rank
RBIL
AQLT
RBIL vs. AQLT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) and iShares MSCI Global Quality Factor ETF (AQLT). 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.
| RBIL | AQLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.83 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +4.84 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 2.39 | 1.39 | +1.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 17.00 | 2.73 | +14.27 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 70.66 | 12.25 | +58.41 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RBIL | AQLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.01 | 2.18 | +2.83 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 4.28 | 1.09 | +3.19 |
Drawdowns
RBIL vs. AQLT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RBIL drawdown since its inception was -0.50%, smaller than the maximum AQLT drawdown of -16.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RBIL and AQLT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RBIL | AQLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.50% | -16.84% | +16.34% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.27% | -10.68% | +10.41% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.37% | +0.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.06% | -2.32% | +2.26% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.07% | 2.37% | -2.30% |
Volatility
RBIL vs. AQLT - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) is 0.30%, while iShares MSCI Global Quality Factor ETF (AQLT) has a volatility of 3.54%. This indicates that RBIL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AQLT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RBIL | AQLT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.30% | 3.54% | -3.24% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.79% | 10.82% | -10.03% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.92% | 13.39% | -12.47% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.05% | 16.99% | -15.94% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.05% | 16.99% | -15.94% |
RBIL vs. AQLT - Expense Ratio Comparison
RBIL has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than AQLT's 0.20% 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
RBIL vs. AQLT - Dividend Comparison
RBIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.60%, more than AQLT's 0.93% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
AQLT iShares MSCI Global Quality Factor ETF | 0.93% | 1.05% | 0.02% |
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF | 4.60% | 3.65% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RBIL and AQLT have a correlation of -0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AQLT has higher volatility (3.54%) compared to RBIL (0.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RBIL dropped -0.50% vs AQLT's -16.84%.
On 1-year performance, AQLT leads with 29.00% vs 4.57% for RBIL. On fees, RBIL is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, RBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, AQLT has performed better with a 29.00% return vs 4.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RBIL is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for AQLT.
RBIL has the higher dividend yield at 4.60%, compared with 0.93% for AQLT.
RBIL is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while AQLT is Global Equities. RBIL tracks Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index, while AQLT tracks MSCI ACWI Quality Index (Net). They also come from different issuers: F/m and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for RBIL and 0.20% for AQLT.
RBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.01 vs 2.18), 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 RBIL and AQLT
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