XXXX vs. RBIL

Last updated Aug 6, 2026

XXXX (MAX S&P 500 4X Leveraged ETN) and RBIL (F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XXXX is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the S&P 500 Index (400%), while RBIL is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, XXXX returned 62.47% vs 3.81% for RBIL. Their -0.21 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. XXXX charges 2.95%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for RBIL.

Performance

XXXX vs. RBIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MAX S&P 500 4X Leveraged ETN (XXXX) and F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XXXX achieves a 32.17% return, which is significantly higher than RBIL's 2.61% return.

XXXX

• 1D: -0.58%
• 1M: 6.78%
• 6M: 33.16%
• YTD: 32.17%
• 1Y: 62.47%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 49.51%

RBIL

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: 0.18%
• 6M: 2.25%
• YTD: 2.61%
• 1Y: 3.81%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 3.81%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF	$1.19M	$1.87M	$2.26M
XXXX MAX S&P 500 4X Leveraged ETN	$23.99M	$24.46M	$27.16M

XXXX vs. RBIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
XXXX MAX S&P 500 4X Leveraged ETN	32.17%	15.21%
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF	2.61%	2.85%

Correlation

The correlation between XXXX and RBIL is -0.21, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2025	-0.21

Return for Risk

XXXX vs. RBIL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

XXXX

XXXX Risk / Return Rank: 43
XXXX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
XXXX Sortino Ratio Rank: 41
XXXX Omega Ratio Rank: 42
XXXX Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
XXXX Martin Ratio Rank: 46

RBIL

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

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

XXXX vs. RBIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MAX S&P 500 4X Leveraged ETN (XXXX) 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.

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.

	XXXX	RBIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.24	3.98	-2.74
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.75	6.13	-4.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	2.00	-0.78
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.69	6.80	-5.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.87	27.52	-21.65

XXXX vs. RBIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XXXX Sharpe Ratio is 1.24, which is lower than the RBIL Sharpe Ratio of 3.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XXXX and RBIL, 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

XXXX vs. RBIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XXXX drawdown since its inception was -62.27%, which is greater than RBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XXXX and RBIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	XXXX	RBIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.27%	-0.56%	-61.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-37.25%	-0.56%	-36.69%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.74%	-0.22%	-0.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.50%	-0.08%	-11.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	10.68%	0.14%	+10.54%

Volatility

XXXX vs. RBIL - Volatility Comparison

MAX S&P 500 4X Leveraged ETN (XXXX) has a higher volatility of 16.28% compared to F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF (RBIL) at 0.28%. This indicates that XXXX'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.

Volatility by Period

	XXXX	RBIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.28%	0.28%	+16.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	40.94%	0.89%	+40.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	50.87%	0.96%	+49.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	60.79%	1.06%	+59.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	60.79%	1.06%	+59.73%

XXXX vs. RBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

XXXX has a 2.95% expense ratio, which is higher than RBIL's 0.17% expense ratio.

Dividends

XXXX vs. RBIL - Dividend Comparison

XXXX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while RBIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.16%.

Position	TTM	2025
RBIL F/m Ultrashort Treasury Inflation-Protected Security (TIPS) ETF	4.16%	3.65%
XXXX MAX S&P 500 4X Leveraged ETN	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XXXX and RBIL in my portfolio?

XXXX 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.

Which is riskier, XXXX or RBIL?

XXXX has higher volatility (16.28%) compared to RBIL (0.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XXXX dropped -62.27% vs RBIL's -0.56%.

Which ETF is better, XXXX or RBIL?

On 1-year performance, XXXX leads with 62.47% vs 3.81% for RBIL. On fees, RBIL is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, RBIL has been the lower-risk option at 0.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XXXX or RBIL?

Over the 1-year period, XXXX has performed better with a 62.47% return vs 3.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XXXX or RBIL?

RBIL is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 2.95% for XXXX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XXXX or RBIL?

RBIL has the higher dividend yield at 4.16%, compared with 0.00% for XXXX.

What is the main difference between XXXX and RBIL?

XXXX is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while RBIL is Inflation-Protected Bonds. XXXX tracks S&P 500 Index (400%), while RBIL tracks Bloomberg US Ultrashort TIPS 1-13 Months Index. They also come from different issuers: Max and F/m. Their fees differ too: 2.95% for XXXX and 0.17% for RBIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.98 vs 1.24), 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.