PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
TFPN vs. BILS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

TFPN vs. BILS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Blueprint Chesapeake Multi-Asset Trend ETF (TFPN) and SPDR Bloomberg 3-12 Month T-Bill ETF (BILS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TFPN achieves a 27.01% return, which is significantly higher than BILS's 1.40% return.


TFPN

1D
0.91%
1M
5.79%
YTD
27.01%
6M
28.49%
1Y
45.99%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BILS

1D
-0.01%
1M
0.28%
YTD
1.40%
6M
1.73%
1Y
3.90%
3Y*
4.66%
5Y*
3.29%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

TFPN vs. BILS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
TFPN
Blueprint Chesapeake Multi-Asset Trend ETF
27.01%3.61%2.67%-1.60%
BILS
SPDR Bloomberg 3-12 Month T-Bill ETF
1.40%4.23%5.17%2.59%

Correlation

The correlation between TFPN and BILS 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 Jul 13, 2023

-0.12

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

TFPN vs. BILS — Risk / Return Rank

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

TFPN
TFPN Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
TFPN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TFPN Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
TFPN Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
TFPN Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
TFPN Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank

BILS
BILS Risk / Return Rank: 100100
Overall Rank
BILS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BILS Sortino Ratio Rank: 100100
Sortino Ratio Rank
BILS Omega Ratio Rank: 100100
Omega Ratio Rank
BILS Calmar Ratio Rank: 100100
Calmar Ratio Rank
BILS Martin Ratio Rank: 100100
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

TFPN vs. BILS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Blueprint Chesapeake Multi-Asset Trend ETF (TFPN) and SPDR Bloomberg 3-12 Month T-Bill ETF (BILS). 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.


TFPNBILSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-13.42

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-96.38

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.60

42.08

-40.47

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.19

129.91

-123.72

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

21.51

1,442.41

-1,420.90

TFPN vs. BILS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TFPN Sharpe Ratio is 3.37, which is lower than the BILS Sharpe Ratio of 16.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TFPN and BILS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


TFPNBILSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.37

16.80

-13.42

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

10.79

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.83

9.79

-8.96

Drawdowns

TFPN vs. BILS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TFPN drawdown since its inception was -16.72%, which is greater than BILS's maximum drawdown of -0.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TFPN and BILS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


TFPNBILSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-16.72%

-0.41%

-16.31%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.47%

-0.03%

-7.44%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-0.04%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-0.38%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.01%

+0.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.89%

-0.04%

-4.85%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.14%

0.00%

+2.14%

Volatility

TFPN vs. BILS - Volatility Comparison

Blueprint Chesapeake Multi-Asset Trend ETF (TFPN) has a higher volatility of 4.55% compared to SPDR Bloomberg 3-12 Month T-Bill ETF (BILS) at 0.06%. This indicates that TFPN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BILS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


TFPNBILSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.55%

0.06%

+4.49%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.50%

0.14%

+11.36%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.70%

0.23%

+13.47%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.53%

0.31%

+12.22%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.53%

0.30%

+12.23%

TFPN vs. BILS - Expense Ratio Comparison

TFPN has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is higher than BILS's 0.14% expense ratio.


Dividends

TFPN vs. BILS - Dividend Comparison

TFPN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BILS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.81%.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
BILS
SPDR Bloomberg 3-12 Month T-Bill ETF
3.81%4.08%5.01%4.98%1.61%
TFPN
Blueprint Chesapeake Multi-Asset Trend ETF
0.00%0.00%0.94%0.98%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


TFPN and BILS 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.

TFPN has higher volatility (4.55%) compared to BILS (0.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TFPN dropped -16.72% vs BILS's -0.41%.

On 1-year performance, TFPN leads with 45.99% vs 3.90% for BILS. On fees, BILS is cheaper at 0.14% per year. On volatility, BILS has been the lower-risk option at 0.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, TFPN has performed better with a 45.99% return vs 3.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BILS is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for TFPN.

BILS has the higher dividend yield at 3.81%, compared with 0.00% for TFPN.

TFPN is categorized as Global Allocation, while BILS is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Tidal ETFs and State Street. Their fees differ too: 1.10% for TFPN and 0.14% for BILS.

BILS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (16.80 vs 3.37), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for TFPN and BILS

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