RBIL vs. FLJH

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

RBIL (F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF) and FLJH (Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RBIL is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index, while FLJH is a Japan Equities fund tracking the FTSE Japan RIC Capped Hedged to USD Net Tax Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, RBIL returned 4.01% vs 47.07% for FLJH. At a correlation of -0.22, they often move in opposite directions. RBIL charges 0.17%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for FLJH.

Performance

RBIL vs. FLJH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) and Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RBIL achieves a 2.52% return, which is significantly lower than FLJH's 22.67% return.

RBIL

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: -0.06%
• 6M: 2.34%
• YTD: 2.52%
• 1Y: 4.01%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLJH

• 1D: 1.15%
• 1M: 3.21%
• 6M: 15.93%
• YTD: 22.67%
• 1Y: 47.07%
• 3Y*: 28.43%
• 5Y*: 21.65%
• 10Y*: —

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

RBIL vs. FLJH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF	2.52%	2.85%
FLJH Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF	22.67%	28.37%

Correlation

The correlation between RBIL and FLJH is -0.27, 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	-0.27
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2025	-0.22

Return for Risk

RBIL vs. FLJH — Risk / Return Rank

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

RBIL

RBIL Risk / Return Rank: 97
RBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
RBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
RBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 98
RBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
RBIL Martin Ratio Rank: 97

FLJH

FLJH Risk / Return Rank: 90
FLJH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
FLJH Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
FLJH Omega Ratio Rank: 90
FLJH Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
FLJH Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

RBIL vs. FLJH - 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 Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH). 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.

	RBIL	FLJH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.24	2.47	+1.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.51	3.26	+3.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.10	1.45	+0.65
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.16	4.38	+2.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	30.37	16.55	+13.82

RBIL vs. FLJH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RBIL Sharpe Ratio is 4.24, which is higher than the FLJH Sharpe Ratio of 2.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RBIL and FLJH, 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

RBIL vs. FLJH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RBIL drawdown since its inception was -0.56%, smaller than the maximum FLJH drawdown of -31.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RBIL and FLJH.

Drawdown Indicators

	RBIL	FLJH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.56%	-31.51%	+30.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.56%	-10.80%	+10.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-20.39%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.39%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.31%	-2.10%	+1.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.08%	-5.28%	+5.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.13%	2.85%	-2.72%

Volatility

RBIL vs. FLJH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) is 0.31%, while Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF (FLJH) has a volatility of 6.88%. This indicates that RBIL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLJH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RBIL	FLJH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.31%	6.88%	-6.57%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.88%	14.95%	-14.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.95%	19.18%	-18.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.06%	18.72%	-17.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.06%	19.88%	-18.82%

RBIL vs. FLJH - Expense Ratio Comparison

RBIL has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is higher than FLJH's 0.09% expense ratio. However, 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. FLJH - Dividend Comparison

RBIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.38%, more than FLJH's 2.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLJH Franklin FTSE Japan Hedged ETF	2.45%	3.90%	5.06%	25.59%	26.67%	1.29%	0.00%	0.00%	5.92%	0.10%
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF	4.38%	3.65%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RBIL and FLJH in my portfolio?

RBIL and FLJH have a correlation of -0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RBIL or FLJH?

FLJH has higher volatility (6.88%) compared to RBIL (0.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RBIL dropped -0.56% vs FLJH's -31.51%.

Which ETF is better, RBIL or FLJH?

On 1-year performance, FLJH leads with 47.07% vs 4.01% for RBIL. On fees, FLJH is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, RBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RBIL or FLJH?

Over the 1-year period, FLJH has performed better with a 47.07% return vs 4.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RBIL or FLJH?

FLJH is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.17% for RBIL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RBIL or FLJH?

RBIL has the higher dividend yield at 4.38%, compared with 2.45% for FLJH.

What is the main difference between RBIL and FLJH?

RBIL is categorized as Inflation-Protected Bonds, while FLJH is Japan Equities. RBIL tracks Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index, while FLJH tracks FTSE Japan RIC Capped Hedged to USD Net Tax Index. They also come from different issuers: F/m and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for RBIL and 0.09% for FLJH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.24 vs 2.47), 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.