ATFV vs. BIBL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ATFV (Alger 35 ETF) and BIBL (Inspire 100 ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - ATFV tracks the S&P 500 while BIBL tracks the Inspire 100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ATFV returned 15.56%/yr vs 10.11%/yr for BIBL. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ATFV charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for BIBL.

Performance

ATFV vs. BIBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alger 35 ETF (ATFV) 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, ATFV achieves a 16.46% return, which is significantly lower than BIBL's 23.84% return.

ATFV

• 1D: -2.00%
• 1M: 8.35%
• YTD: 16.46%
• 6M: 16.04%
• 1Y: 48.62%
• 3Y*: 39.26%
• 5Y*: 15.56%
• 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)

ATFV vs. BIBL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
ATFV Alger 35 ETF	16.46%	38.20%	46.14%	32.75%	-35.97%	4.19%
BIBL Inspire 100 ETF	23.84%	17.27%	12.49%	17.87%	-23.26%	13.74%

Correlation

The correlation between ATFV and BIBL is 0.56, 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	0.56
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.65
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2021	0.75

The correlation between ATFV and BIBL shifts across timeframes, from 0.56 (1 year) to 0.76 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ATFV vs. BIBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ATFV	BIBL
Technology	42.1%	30.1%
Communication Services	25.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	10.2%	0.3%
Healthcare	8.6%	4.3%
Industrials	8.2%	26.8%
Utilities	2.7%	3.5%
Financial Services	2.5%	8.3%
Basic Materials	-	4.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	0.5%
Energy	-	6.9%
Real Estate	-	14.7%

Return for Risk

ATFV vs. BIBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

ATFV

ATFV Risk / Return Rank: 56
ATFV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
ATFV Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
ATFV Omega Ratio Rank: 55
ATFV Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
ATFV Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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.

ATFV vs. BIBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alger 35 ETF (ATFV) 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.

	ATFV	BIBL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.12	2.62	-0.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.79	3.53	-0.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.45	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.67	4.53	-1.86
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.15	19.63	-10.49
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ATFV vs. BIBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ATFV Sharpe Ratio is 2.12, which is comparable to the BIBL Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ATFV 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

	ATFV	BIBL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.12	2.62	-0.50
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.59	0.52	+0.07
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.59	0.63	-0.04

Drawdowns

ATFV vs. BIBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ATFV drawdown since its inception was -45.34%, which is greater than BIBL's maximum drawdown of -36.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ATFV and BIBL.

Drawdown Indicators

	ATFV	BIBL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.34%	-36.12%	-9.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.29%	-8.94%	-9.35%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.01%	-20.60%	-8.41%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-45.34%	-30.85%	-14.49%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.72%	0.00%	-2.72%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.81%	-7.04%	-10.77%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.33%	2.06%	+3.27%

Volatility

ATFV vs. BIBL - Volatility Comparison

Alger 35 ETF (ATFV) has a higher volatility of 7.65% compared to Inspire 100 ETF (BIBL) at 4.62%. This indicates that ATFV'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

	ATFV	BIBL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.65%	4.62%	+3.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.34%	12.63%	+4.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.00%	15.47%	+7.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.62%	19.59%	+7.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.55%	21.08%	+5.47%

ATFV vs. BIBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

ATFV has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than BIBL's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

ATFV vs. BIBL - Dividend Comparison

ATFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.17%, less than BIBL's 0.95% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ATFV Alger 35 ETF	0.17%	0.20%	0.16%	0.01%	0.06%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	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 ATFV and BIBL in my portfolio?

ATFV and BIBL have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ATFV or BIBL?

ATFV has higher volatility (7.65%) compared to BIBL (4.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ATFV dropped -45.34% vs BIBL's -36.12%.

Which ETF is better, ATFV or BIBL?

On 5-year performance, ATFV leads with 15.56% 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, ATFV or BIBL?

Over the 5-year period, ATFV has performed better with a 15.56% return vs 10.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ATFV or BIBL?

BIBL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for ATFV.

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

BIBL has the higher dividend yield at 0.95%, compared with 0.17% for ATFV.

What is the main difference between ATFV and BIBL?

ATFV tracks S&P 500, while BIBL tracks Inspire 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Alger Group Holdings LLC and Inspire. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for ATFV and 0.35% for BIBL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BIBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 vs 2.12), 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.