RFIX vs. ILS
RFIX (Simplify Bond Bull ETF) and ILS (Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF) are both Nontraditional Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RFIX returned -14.17% vs 5.66% for ILS. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. RFIX charges 0.50%/yr vs 1.58%/yr for ILS.
Performance
RFIX vs. ILS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RFIX achieves a 12.02% return, which is significantly higher than ILS's 0.48% return.
RFIX
- 1D
- 4.23%
- 1M
- 3.11%
- YTD
- 12.02%
- 6M
- 5.31%
- 1Y
- -14.17%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ILS
- 1D
- -1.75%
- 1M
- -0.51%
- YTD
- 0.48%
- 6M
- 0.53%
- 1Y
- 5.66%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RFIX vs. ILS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
RFIX Simplify Bond Bull ETF | 12.02% | -29.61% |
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF | 0.48% | 3.54% |
Correlation
The correlation between RFIX and ILS is -0.10, 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 | -0.10 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 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
RFIX vs. ILS — Risk / Return Rank
RFIX
ILS
RFIX vs. ILS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Simplify Bond Bull ETF (RFIX) 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.
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.
| RFIX | ILS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.30 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.92 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.95 | 1.44 | -0.49 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.56 | 3.25 | -3.81 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.93 | 30.49 | -31.42 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RFIX vs. ILS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RFIX drawdown since its inception was -38.79%, which is greater than ILS's maximum drawdown of -2.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFIX and ILS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RFIX | ILS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -38.79% | -2.46% | -36.33% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -25.48% | -1.75% | -23.73% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -29.71% | -1.75% | -27.96% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -24.32% | -0.54% | -23.78% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 15.20% | 0.19% | +15.01% |
Volatility
RFIX vs. ILS - Volatility Comparison
Simplify Bond Bull ETF (RFIX) has a higher volatility of 9.34% compared to Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) at 1.95%. This indicates that RFIX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ILS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RFIX | ILS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.34% | 1.95% | +7.39% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 20.82% | 2.45% | +18.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 30.30% | 3.12% | +27.18% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 31.17% | 4.09% | +27.08% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 31.17% | 4.09% | +27.08% |
RFIX vs. ILS - Expense Ratio Comparison
RFIX has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than ILS's 1.58% expense ratio.
Dividends
RFIX vs. ILS - Dividend Comparison
RFIX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.46%, less than ILS's 8.20% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF | 8.20% | 6.06% |
RFIX Simplify Bond Bull ETF | 4.46% | 5.07% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RFIX and ILS have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RFIX has higher volatility (9.34%) compared to ILS (1.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFIX dropped -38.79% vs ILS's -2.46%.
On 1-year performance, ILS leads with 5.66% vs -14.17% for RFIX. On fees, RFIX is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, ILS has been the lower-risk option at 1.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, ILS has performed better with a 5.66% return vs -14.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
RFIX is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 1.58% for ILS.
ILS has the higher dividend yield at 8.20%, compared with 4.46% for RFIX.
They also come from different issuers: Simplify and Brookmont. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for RFIX and 1.58% for ILS.
ILS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.83 vs -0.47), 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.
Find the right allocation for RFIX and ILS
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