ABLD vs. ABFL

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

ABLD (Abacus FCF Real Assets Leaders ETF) and ABFL (Abacus FCF Leaders ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ABLD is a Mid Cap Value Equities fund tracking the FCF Yield Enhanced Real Asset Index, while ABFL is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Abacus. ABLD is passively managed, while ABFL is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, ABLD returned 11.56%/yr vs 19.15%/yr for ABFL. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ABLD charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for ABFL.

Performance

ABLD vs. ABFL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Abacus FCF Real Assets Leaders ETF (ABLD) and Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ABLD achieves a 5.59% return, which is significantly lower than ABFL's 18.93% return.

ABLD

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: -3.12%
• YTD: 5.59%
• 6M: 6.01%
• 1Y: 11.17%
• 3Y*: 11.56%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ABFL

• 1D: 1.39%
• 1M: 3.86%
• YTD: 18.93%
• 6M: 16.87%
• 1Y: 24.51%
• 3Y*: 19.15%
• 5Y*: 12.94%
• 10Y*: —

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

ABLD vs. ABFL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
ABLD Abacus FCF Real Assets Leaders ETF	5.59%	6.64%	7.05%	18.89%	7.42%	3.86%
ABFL Abacus FCF Leaders ETF	18.93%	8.07%	18.26%	22.97%	-14.60%	2.78%

Correlation

The correlation between ABLD and ABFL is 0.61, 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	0.61
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 14, 2021	0.68

The correlation between ABLD and ABFL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

ABLD vs. ABFL — Risk / Return Rank

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

ABLD

ABLD Risk / Return Rank: 21
ABLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
ABLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
ABLD Omega Ratio Rank: 21
ABLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
ABLD Martin Ratio Rank: 23

ABFL

ABFL Risk / Return Rank: 53
ABFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
ABFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
ABFL Omega Ratio Rank: 42
ABFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
ABFL Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

ABLD vs. ABFL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Abacus FCF Real Assets Leaders ETF (ABLD) and Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL). 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.

	ABLD	ABFL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.75	1.53	-0.79
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.09	2.12	-1.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	1.27	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.96	3.43	-2.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.86	10.98	-8.12

ABLD vs. ABFL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ABLD Sharpe Ratio is 0.75, which is lower than the ABFL Sharpe Ratio of 1.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ABLD and ABFL, 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

ABLD vs. ABFL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ABLD drawdown since its inception was -19.35%, smaller than the maximum ABFL drawdown of -34.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ABLD and ABFL.

Drawdown Indicators

	ABLD	ABFL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.35%	-34.95%	+15.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.64%	-7.17%	-4.47%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.35%	-19.92%	+0.57%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-21.88%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-9.88%	0.00%	-9.88%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.01%	-4.97%	+0.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.91%	2.24%	+1.67%

Volatility

ABLD vs. ABFL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Abacus FCF Real Assets Leaders ETF (ABLD) is 4.17%, while Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) has a volatility of 5.90%. This indicates that ABLD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ABFL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ABLD	ABFL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.17%	5.90%	-1.73%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.17%	12.66%	+0.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.08%	16.12%	-1.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.51%	17.25%	+0.26%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.51%	18.75%	-1.24%

ABLD vs. ABFL - Expense Ratio Comparison

ABLD has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than ABFL's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

ABLD vs. ABFL - Dividend Comparison

ABLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.32%, more than ABFL's 0.53% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ABFL Abacus FCF Leaders ETF	0.53%	0.62%	0.70%	0.94%	1.36%	9.63%	0.41%	0.72%	0.62%	0.40%
ABLD Abacus FCF Real Assets Leaders ETF	4.32%	2.86%	10.13%	4.70%	8.40%	0.08%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ABLD and ABFL in my portfolio?

ABLD and ABFL have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ABLD or ABFL?

ABFL has higher volatility (5.90%) compared to ABLD (4.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ABLD dropped -19.35% vs ABFL's -34.95%.

Which ETF is better, ABLD or ABFL?

On 3-year performance, ABFL leads with 19.15% vs 11.56% for ABLD. On fees, ABLD is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, ABLD has been the lower-risk option at 4.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ABLD or ABFL?

Over the 3-year period, ABFL has performed better with a 19.15% return vs 11.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ABLD or ABFL?

ABLD is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for ABFL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ABLD or ABFL?

ABLD has the higher dividend yield at 4.32%, compared with 0.53% for ABFL.

What is the main difference between ABLD and ABFL?

ABLD is categorized as Mid Cap Value Equities, while ABFL is Large Cap Blend Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ABLD and 0.49% for ABFL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ABFL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.53 vs 0.75), 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.