TFFI vs. BLST

Last updated Jul 10, 2026

TFFI (Chesapeake Trend-Following Fixed Income ETF) and BLST (Bluemonte Short Term Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TFFI is a Actively Managed fund actively managed by Chesapeake, while BLST is a Short-Term Bond fund managed by Bluemonte. At a correlation of -0.44, they often move in opposite directions. TFFI charges 1.01%/yr vs 0.23%/yr for BLST.

Performance

TFFI vs. BLST - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Chesapeake Trend-Following Fixed Income ETF (TFFI) and Bluemonte Short Term Bond ETF (BLST). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

TFFI

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: -0.27%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BLST

• 1D: 0.16%
• 1M: 0.28%
• 6M: 0.44%
• YTD: 0.46%
• 1Y: 3.34%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TFFI vs. BLST - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
TFFI Chesapeake Trend-Following Fixed Income ETF	0.03%
BLST Bluemonte Short Term Bond ETF	-0.50%

Correlation

The correlation between TFFI and BLST is -0.44, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2026	-0.44

Return for Risk

TFFI vs. BLST — Risk / Return Rank

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

TFFI

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

BLST

BLST Risk / Return Rank: 52
BLST Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
BLST Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
BLST Omega Ratio Rank: 54
BLST Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
BLST Martin Ratio Rank: 46

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.

TFFI vs. BLST - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Chesapeake Trend-Following Fixed Income ETF (TFFI) and Bluemonte Short Term Bond ETF (BLST). 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.

	TFFI	BLST	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.49	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.24	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.27	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	1.98	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	5.96	—

Drawdowns

TFFI vs. BLST - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TFFI drawdown since its inception was -4.23%, which is greater than BLST's maximum drawdown of -1.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TFFI and BLST.

Drawdown Indicators

	TFFI	BLST	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.23%	-1.69%	-2.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-1.69%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.08%	-0.70%	-1.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.65%	-0.38%	-1.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.56%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	TFFI	BLST	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	0.78%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	1.76%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.06%	2.25%	+5.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.06%	2.27%	+5.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.06%	2.27%	+5.79%

TFFI vs. BLST - Expense Ratio Comparison

TFFI has a 1.01% expense ratio, which is higher than BLST's 0.23% expense ratio.

Dividends

TFFI vs. BLST - Dividend Comparison

TFFI has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BLST's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.71%.

Position	TTM	2025
BLST Bluemonte Short Term Bond ETF	3.71%	2.11%
TFFI Chesapeake Trend-Following Fixed Income ETF	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TFFI and BLST in my portfolio?

TFFI and BLST have a correlation of -0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, TFFI or BLST?

On fees, BLST is cheaper at 0.23% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, TFFI or BLST?

BLST is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for TFFI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TFFI or BLST?

BLST has the higher dividend yield at 3.71%, compared with 0.00% for TFFI.

What is the main difference between TFFI and BLST?

TFFI is categorized as Actively Managed, while BLST is Short-Term Bond. They also come from different issuers: Chesapeake and Bluemonte. Their fees differ too: 1.01% for TFFI and 0.23% for BLST.