RINF vs. RBIL
RINF (ProShares Inflation Expectations ETF) and RBIL (F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF) are both Inflation-Protected Bonds funds - RINF tracks the FTSE 30-Year TIPS (Treasury Rate-Hedged) Index while RBIL tracks the Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, RINF returned 2.48% vs 4.57% for RBIL. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RINF charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for RBIL.
Performance
RINF vs. RBIL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RINF achieves a 2.37% return, which is significantly lower than RBIL's 2.70% return.
RINF
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- 0.43%
- YTD
- 2.37%
- 6M
- 3.08%
- 1Y
- 2.48%
- 3Y*
- 4.84%
- 5Y*
- 5.43%
- 10Y*
- 4.69%
RBIL
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- 0.38%
- YTD
- 2.70%
- 6M
- 2.79%
- 1Y
- 4.57%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RINF vs. RBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
RINF ProShares Inflation Expectations ETF | 2.37% | 2.26% |
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF | 2.70% | 2.91% |
Correlation
The correlation between RINF and RBIL is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 26, 2025 | 0.14 |
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
RINF vs. RBIL — Risk / Return Rank
RINF
RBIL
RINF vs. RBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Inflation Expectations ETF (RINF) and F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL). 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.
| RINF | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -4.46 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -7.10 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.10 | 2.39 | -1.29 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.96 | 17.00 | -16.04 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.83 | 70.66 | -68.83 |
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
| RINF | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.56 | 5.01 | -4.46 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.43 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.37 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.08 | 4.28 | -4.19 |
Drawdowns
RINF vs. RBIL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RINF drawdown since its inception was -43.51%, which is greater than RBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RINF and RBIL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RINF | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -43.51% | -0.50% | -43.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.60% | -0.27% | -2.33% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.62% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -13.58% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -29.18% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.66% | 0.00% | -0.66% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.45% | -0.06% | -16.39% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.37% | 0.07% | +1.30% |
Volatility
RINF vs. RBIL - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Inflation Expectations ETF (RINF) has a higher volatility of 1.19% compared to F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) at 0.30%. This indicates that RINF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RBIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RINF | RBIL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.19% | 0.30% | +0.89% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.77% | 0.79% | +1.98% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.49% | 0.92% | +3.57% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.82% | 1.05% | +11.77% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.57% | 1.05% | +11.52% |
RINF vs. RBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison
RINF has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than RBIL's 0.17% expense ratio.
Dividends
RINF vs. RBIL - Dividend Comparison
RINF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.70%, less than RBIL's 4.60% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF | 4.60% | 3.65% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
RINF ProShares Inflation Expectations ETF | 3.70% | 3.89% | 4.68% | 5.07% | 1.15% | 2.76% | 0.82% | 1.90% | 2.47% | 2.99% | 1.09% | 1.83% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RINF and RBIL have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RINF has higher volatility (1.19%) compared to RBIL (0.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RINF dropped -43.51% vs RBIL's -0.50%.
On 1-year performance, RBIL leads with 4.57% vs 2.48% for RINF. 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, RBIL has performed better with a 4.57% return vs 2.48%. 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 0.30% for RINF.
RBIL has the higher dividend yield at 4.60%, compared with 3.70% for RINF.
RINF tracks FTSE 30-Year TIPS (Treasury Rate-Hedged) Index, while RBIL tracks Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and F/m. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for RINF and 0.17% for RBIL.
RBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.01 vs 0.56), 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 RINF and RBIL
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