AESR vs. BIBL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AESR (Anfield U.S. Equity Sector Rotation ETF) and BIBL (Inspire 100 ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. AESR is actively managed, while BIBL is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, AESR returned 15.28%/yr vs 10.11%/yr for BIBL. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. AESR charges 1.46%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for BIBL.

Performance

AESR vs. BIBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Anfield U.S. Equity Sector Rotation ETF (AESR) and Inspire 100 ETF (BIBL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AESR achieves a 20.98% return, which is significantly lower than BIBL's 23.84% return.

AESR

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: 7.94%
• YTD: 20.98%
• 6M: 21.17%
• 1Y: 39.18%
• 3Y*: 26.82%
• 5Y*: 15.28%
• 10Y*: —

BIBL

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: 5.68%
• YTD: 23.84%
• 6M: 22.77%
• 1Y: 40.34%
• 3Y*: 22.20%
• 5Y*: 10.11%
• 10Y*: —

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

AESR vs. BIBL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
AESR Anfield U.S. Equity Sector Rotation ETF	20.98%	20.34%	25.37%	21.03%	-17.52%	25.26%	19.58%	0.76%
BIBL Inspire 100 ETF	23.84%	17.27%	12.49%	17.87%	-23.26%	27.44%	22.62%	1.69%

Correlation

The correlation between AESR and BIBL is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.81
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 18, 2019	0.87

The correlation between AESR and BIBL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

AESR vs. BIBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AESR	BIBL
Technology	33.8%	30.1%
Communication Services	26.0%	-
Consumer Cyclical	12.8%	0.3%
Industrials	10.6%	26.8%
Financial Services	7.0%	8.3%
Basic Materials	2.7%	4.2%
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	0.5%
Energy	2.1%	6.9%
Healthcare	2.0%	4.3%
Utilities	0.3%	3.5%
Real Estate	0.3%	14.7%

Return for Risk

AESR vs. BIBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

AESR

AESR Risk / Return Rank: 75
AESR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
AESR Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
AESR Omega Ratio Rank: 70
AESR Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
AESR Martin Ratio Rank: 83

BIBL

BIBL Risk / Return Rank: 81
BIBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
BIBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
BIBL Omega Ratio Rank: 75
BIBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
BIBL Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

AESR vs. BIBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Anfield U.S. Equity Sector Rotation ETF (AESR) and Inspire 100 ETF (BIBL). 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.

	AESR	BIBL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.40	2.62	-0.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.20	3.53	-0.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.45	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.01	4.53	-0.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.87	19.63	-2.76
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AESR vs. BIBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AESR Sharpe Ratio is 2.40, which is comparable to the BIBL Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AESR and BIBL, 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

	AESR	BIBL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.40	2.62	-0.22
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86	0.52	+0.34
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.83	0.63	+0.21

Drawdowns

AESR vs. BIBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AESR drawdown since its inception was -31.06%, smaller than the maximum BIBL drawdown of -36.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AESR and BIBL.

Drawdown Indicators

	AESR	BIBL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.06%	-36.12%	+5.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.82%	-8.94%	-0.88%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.85%	-20.60%	+0.75%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.04%	-30.85%	+5.81%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.05%	0.00%	-0.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.02%	-7.04%	+1.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.33%	2.06%	+0.27%

Volatility

AESR vs. BIBL - Volatility Comparison

Anfield U.S. Equity Sector Rotation ETF (AESR) has a higher volatility of 5.52% compared to Inspire 100 ETF (BIBL) at 4.62%. This indicates that AESR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BIBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AESR	BIBL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.52%	4.62%	+0.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.73%	12.63%	+0.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.39%	15.47%	+0.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.83%	19.59%	-1.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.44%	21.08%	-0.64%

AESR vs. BIBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

AESR has a 1.46% expense ratio, which is higher than BIBL's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

AESR vs. BIBL - Dividend Comparison

AESR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 19.03%, more than BIBL's 0.95% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
AESR Anfield U.S. Equity Sector Rotation ETF	19.03%	23.02%	0.17%	0.33%	0.73%	6.59%	1.06%	0.33%	0.00%	0.00%
BIBL Inspire 100 ETF	0.95%	1.01%	0.92%	1.02%	0.98%	17.87%	1.67%	1.30%	1.49%	0.31%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AESR and BIBL in my portfolio?

AESR and BIBL have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AESR or BIBL?

AESR has higher volatility (5.52%) compared to BIBL (4.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AESR dropped -31.06% vs BIBL's -36.12%.

Which ETF is better, AESR or BIBL?

On 5-year performance, AESR leads with 15.28% vs 10.11% for BIBL. On fees, BIBL is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, BIBL has been the lower-risk option at 4.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AESR or BIBL?

Over the 5-year period, AESR has performed better with a 15.28% return vs 10.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AESR or BIBL?

BIBL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 1.46% for AESR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AESR or BIBL?

AESR has the higher dividend yield at 19.03%, compared with 0.95% for BIBL.

What is the main difference between AESR and BIBL?

They also come from different issuers: Regents Park Funds and Inspire. Their fees differ too: 1.46% for AESR and 0.35% for BIBL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BIBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 vs 2.40), 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.