AADR vs. FWD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AADR (AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright ADR ETF) and FWD (AB Disruptors ETF) are both Global Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, AADR returned 22.10%/yr vs 39.48%/yr for FWD. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AADR charges 1.10%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for FWD.

Performance

AADR vs. FWD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright ADR ETF (AADR) and AB Disruptors ETF (FWD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AADR achieves a -1.56% return, which is significantly lower than FWD's 40.11% return.

AADR

• 1D: -0.79%
• 1M: 1.01%
• YTD: -1.56%
• 6M: 0.12%
• 1Y: 9.54%
• 3Y*: 22.10%
• 5Y*: 6.23%
• 10Y*: 9.28%

FWD

• 1D: -0.27%
• 1M: 14.15%
• YTD: 40.11%
• 6M: 39.78%
• 1Y: 75.95%
• 3Y*: 39.48%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

AADR vs. FWD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
AADR AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright ADR ETF	-1.56%	25.63%	24.58%	22.41%
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	40.11%	32.00%	29.23%	25.66%

Correlation

The correlation between AADR and FWD is 0.68, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.68
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2023	0.68

The correlation between AADR and FWD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

AADR vs. FWD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AADR	FWD
Healthcare	17.9%	6.6%
Basic Materials	16.9%	1.8%
Financial Services	14.6%	0.5%
Industrials	14.6%	17.7%
Technology	9.5%	52.6%
Energy	7.6%	2.6%
Communication Services	7.4%	2.6%
Utilities	5.4%	1.0%
Consumer Cyclical	3.9%	2.4%
Consumer Defensive	2.2%	0.8%
Real Estate	-	0.7%

Return for Risk

AADR vs. FWD — Risk / Return Rank

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

AADR

AADR Risk / Return Rank: 15
AADR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
AADR Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
AADR Omega Ratio Rank: 16
AADR Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
AADR Martin Ratio Rank: 15

FWD

FWD Risk / Return Rank: 87
FWD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
FWD Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
FWD Omega Ratio Rank: 83
FWD Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
FWD Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

AADR vs. FWD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright ADR ETF (AADR) and AB Disruptors ETF (FWD). 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.

	AADR	FWD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.45	3.16	-2.71
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.76	3.78	-3.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	1.50	-0.41
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.50	5.86	-5.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.40	20.83	-19.43
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AADR vs. FWD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AADR Sharpe Ratio is 0.45, which is lower than the FWD Sharpe Ratio of 3.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AADR and FWD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AADR	FWD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.45	3.16	-2.71
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.29	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.42	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.43	1.67	-1.24

Drawdowns

AADR vs. FWD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AADR drawdown since its inception was -45.01%, which is greater than FWD's maximum drawdown of -29.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AADR and FWD.

Drawdown Indicators

	AADR	FWD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.01%	-29.02%	-15.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-19.30%	-13.03%	-6.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.61%	-29.02%	+8.41%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.80%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-45.01%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.54%	-0.27%	-12.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.40%	-4.06%	-5.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.82%	3.66%	+3.16%

Volatility

AADR vs. FWD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright ADR ETF (AADR) is 6.34%, while AB Disruptors ETF (FWD) has a volatility of 7.77%. This indicates that AADR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FWD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AADR	FWD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.34%	7.77%	-1.43%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.55%	18.96%	-1.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.33%	24.15%	-2.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.68%	24.72%	-3.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.20%	24.72%	-2.52%

AADR vs. FWD - Expense Ratio Comparison

AADR has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is higher than FWD's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

AADR vs. FWD - Dividend Comparison

AADR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.54%, more than FWD's 0.08% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AADR AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright ADR ETF	0.54%	0.49%	1.33%	0.74%	3.65%	0.92%	0.11%	0.58%	0.75%	0.74%	0.58%	0.81%
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	0.08%	0.11%	1.89%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AADR and FWD in my portfolio?

AADR and FWD have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AADR or FWD?

FWD has higher volatility (7.77%) compared to AADR (6.34%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AADR dropped -45.01% vs FWD's -29.02%.

Which ETF is better, AADR or FWD?

On 3-year performance, FWD leads with 39.48% vs 22.10% for AADR. On fees, FWD is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, AADR has been the lower-risk option at 6.34%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AADR or FWD?

Over the 3-year period, FWD has performed better with a 39.48% return vs 22.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AADR or FWD?

FWD is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for AADR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AADR or FWD?

AADR has the higher dividend yield at 0.54%, compared with 0.08% for FWD.

What is the main difference between AADR and FWD?

They also come from different issuers: AdvisorShares and AllianceBernstein. Their fees differ too: 1.10% for AADR and 0.65% for FWD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FWD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.16 vs 0.45), 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.