XRPT vs. ILS
XRPT (Volatility Shares 2x XRP ETF) and ILS (Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XRPT is a Cryptocurrency fund actively managed by Volatility Shares, while ILS is a Nontraditional Bonds fund actively managed by Brookmont. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, XRPT returned -88.64% vs 7.67% for ILS. At a correlation of -0.07, they often move in opposite directions. XRPT charges 0.94%/yr vs 1.58%/yr for ILS.
Performance
XRPT vs. ILS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XRPT achieves a -69.02% return, which is significantly lower than ILS's 1.81% return.
XRPT
- 1D
- -2.94%
- 1M
- -28.58%
- YTD
- -69.02%
- 6M
- -79.25%
- 1Y
- -88.64%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ILS
- 1D
- 0.05%
- 1M
- 0.45%
- YTD
- 1.81%
- 6M
- 2.12%
- 1Y
- 7.67%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XRPT vs. ILS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
XRPT Volatility Shares 2x XRP ETF | -69.02% | -67.83% |
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF | 1.81% | 5.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between XRPT and ILS is -0.07, 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 | -0.07 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 23, 2025 | -0.07 |
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
XRPT vs. ILS — Risk / Return Rank
XRPT
ILS
XRPT vs. ILS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Volatility Shares 2x XRP ETF (XRPT) 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.
| XRPT | ILS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.38 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -5.60 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.89 | 1.62 | -0.73 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.94 | 13.93 | -14.87 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.26 | 46.57 | -47.83 |
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
| XRPT | ILS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.59 | 2.79 | -3.38 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.60 | 1.90 | -2.50 |
Drawdowns
XRPT vs. ILS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XRPT drawdown since its inception was -94.78%, which is greater than ILS's maximum drawdown of -1.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XRPT and ILS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XRPT | ILS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -94.78% | -1.56% | -93.22% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -94.78% | -0.55% | -94.23% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -94.78% | 0.00% | -94.78% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -62.98% | -0.25% | -62.73% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 70.21% | 0.17% | +70.04% |
Volatility
XRPT vs. ILS - Volatility Comparison
Volatility Shares 2x XRP ETF (XRPT) has a higher volatility of 27.96% compared to Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF (ILS) at 0.88%. This indicates that XRPT'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
| XRPT | ILS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 27.96% | 0.88% | +27.08% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 105.36% | 1.69% | +103.67% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 150.67% | 2.77% | +147.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 149.42% | 3.38% | +146.04% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 149.42% | 3.38% | +146.04% |
XRPT vs. ILS - Expense Ratio Comparison
XRPT has a 0.94% expense ratio, which is lower than ILS's 1.58% expense ratio.
Dividends
XRPT vs. ILS - Dividend Comparison
XRPT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.01%, less than ILS's 8.09% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
ILS Brookmont Catastrophic Bond ETF | 8.09% | 6.06% |
XRPT Volatility Shares 2x XRP ETF | 5.01% | 1.23% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XRPT and ILS have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
XRPT has higher volatility (27.96%) compared to ILS (0.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XRPT dropped -94.78% vs ILS's -1.56%.
On 1-year performance, ILS leads with 7.67% vs -88.64% for XRPT. On fees, XRPT is cheaper at 0.94% per year. On volatility, ILS has been the lower-risk option at 0.88%. 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 7.67% return vs -88.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XRPT is cheaper with a 0.94% expense ratio, compared with 1.58% for ILS.
ILS has the higher dividend yield at 8.09%, compared with 5.01% for XRPT.
XRPT is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while ILS is Nontraditional Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Volatility Shares and Brookmont. Their fees differ too: 0.94% for XRPT and 1.58% for ILS.
ILS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.79 vs -0.59), 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 XRPT 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