SLON vs. ILS

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

SLON (ProShares Ultra Solana ETF) and ILS (Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SLON is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the Bloomberg Solana Index, while ILS is a Nontraditional Bonds fund actively managed by Brookmont. SLON is passively managed, while ILS is actively managed. Over the past year, SLON returned -91.50% vs 7.47% for ILS. At a correlation of -0.10, they often move in opposite directions. SLON charges 2.14%/yr vs 1.58%/yr for ILS.

Performance

SLON vs. ILS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra Solana ETF (SLON) and Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SLON achieves a -73.34% return, which is significantly lower than ILS's 3.01% return.

SLON

• 1D: -3.36%
• 1M: 2.08%
• 6M: -79.21%
• YTD: -73.34%
• 1Y: -91.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ILS

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 1.03%
• 6M: 3.07%
• YTD: 3.01%
• 1Y: 7.47%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SLON vs. ILS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
SLON ProShares Ultra Solana ETF	-73.34%	-62.89%
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	3.01%	4.64%

Correlation

The correlation between SLON and ILS is -0.11, 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	-0.11
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2025	-0.10

Return for Risk

SLON vs. ILS — Risk / Return Rank

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

SLON

SLON Risk / Return Rank: 3
SLON Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
SLON Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
SLON Omega Ratio Rank: 3
SLON Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
SLON Martin Ratio Rank: 3

ILS

ILS Risk / Return Rank: 97
ILS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
ILS Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
ILS Omega Ratio Rank: 96
ILS Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
ILS Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

SLON vs. ILS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Solana ETF (SLON) 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.

	SLON	ILS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.63	3.03	-3.66
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.31	5.03	-6.34
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.86	1.69	-0.83
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.95	13.56	-14.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.22	50.90	-52.12

SLON vs. ILS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SLON Sharpe Ratio is -0.63, which is lower than the ILS Sharpe Ratio of 3.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SLON and ILS, 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

SLON vs. ILS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SLON drawdown since its inception was -96.31%, which is greater than ILS's maximum drawdown of -2.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SLON and ILS.

Drawdown Indicators

	SLON	ILS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-96.31%	-2.46%	-93.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-96.31%	-0.55%	-95.76%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-94.99%	-0.04%	-94.95%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-67.19%	-0.52%	-66.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	74.75%	0.15%	+74.60%

Volatility

SLON vs. ILS - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra Solana ETF (SLON) has a higher volatility of 36.69% compared to Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) at 0.47%. This indicates that SLON'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.

Volatility by Period

	SLON	ILS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	36.69%	0.47%	+36.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	105.49%	1.47%	+104.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	147.41%	2.49%	+144.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	147.12%	3.70%	+143.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	147.12%	3.70%	+143.42%

SLON vs. ILS - Expense Ratio Comparison

SLON has a 2.14% expense ratio, which is higher than ILS's 1.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

SLON vs. ILS - Dividend Comparison

SLON's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 21.54%, more than ILS's 8.18% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF	8.18%	6.06%
SLON ProShares Ultra Solana ETF	21.54%	5.74%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SLON and ILS in my portfolio?

SLON and ILS have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SLON or ILS?

SLON has higher volatility (36.69%) compared to ILS (0.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SLON dropped -96.31% vs ILS's -2.46%.

Which ETF is better, SLON or ILS?

On 1-year performance, ILS leads with 7.47% vs -91.50% for SLON. On fees, ILS is cheaper at 1.58% per year. On volatility, ILS has been the lower-risk option at 0.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SLON or ILS?

Over the 1-year period, ILS has performed better with a 7.47% return vs -91.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SLON or ILS?

ILS is cheaper with a 1.58% expense ratio, compared with 2.14% for SLON.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SLON or ILS?

SLON has the higher dividend yield at 21.54%, compared with 8.18% for ILS.

What is the main difference between SLON and ILS?

SLON is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while ILS is Nontraditional Bonds. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Brookmont. Their fees differ too: 2.14% for SLON and 1.58% for ILS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ILS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.03 vs -0.63), 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.