AVGV vs. WBIF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AVGV (Avantis ALL Equity Markets Value ETF) and WBIF (WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF) are both Global Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, AVGV returned 36.52% vs 23.01% for WBIF. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. AVGV charges 0.26%/yr vs 1.25%/yr for WBIF.

Performance

AVGV vs. WBIF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Avantis ALL Equity Markets Value ETF (AVGV) and WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AVGV achieves a 16.99% return, which is significantly higher than WBIF's 11.61% return.

AVGV

• 1D: -0.48%
• 1M: 4.06%
• YTD: 16.99%
• 6M: 18.62%
• 1Y: 36.52%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

WBIF

• 1D: -0.97%
• 1M: 5.70%
• YTD: 11.61%
• 6M: 10.57%
• 1Y: 23.01%
• 3Y*: 8.85%
• 5Y*: 2.38%
• 10Y*: 5.52%

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

AVGV vs. WBIF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
AVGV Avantis ALL Equity Markets Value ETF	16.99%	22.57%	11.26%	11.36%
WBIF WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF	11.61%	9.16%	3.43%	-2.30%

Correlation

The correlation between AVGV and WBIF is 0.77, 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	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 30, 2023	0.80

The correlation between AVGV and WBIF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

AVGV vs. WBIF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AVGV	WBIF
Financial Services	21.6%	31.0%
Industrials	16.1%	14.6%
Consumer Cyclical	14.5%	11.1%
Energy	13.6%	2.9%
Technology	10.5%	19.9%
Basic Materials	7.3%	1.0%
Consumer Defensive	5.5%	3.1%
Communication Services	4.9%	2.6%
Healthcare	4.5%	3.4%
Real Estate	0.8%	-
Utilities	0.7%	10.3%

Return for Risk

AVGV vs. WBIF — Risk / Return Rank

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

AVGV

AVGV Risk / Return Rank: 84
AVGV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
AVGV Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
AVGV Omega Ratio Rank: 82
AVGV Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
AVGV Martin Ratio Rank: 84

WBIF

WBIF Risk / Return Rank: 62
WBIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
WBIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
WBIF Omega Ratio Rank: 55
WBIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
WBIF Martin Ratio Rank: 68

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.

AVGV vs. WBIF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Avantis ALL Equity Markets Value ETF (AVGV) and WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF). 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.

	AVGV	WBIF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.84	1.88	+0.96
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.93	2.73	+1.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.34	+0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.52	3.50	+1.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.72	12.53	+5.18
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AVGV vs. WBIF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AVGV Sharpe Ratio is 2.84, which is higher than the WBIF Sharpe Ratio of 1.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AVGV and WBIF, 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

	AVGV	WBIF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.84	1.88	+0.96
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.19	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.45	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.46	0.30	+1.15

Drawdowns

AVGV vs. WBIF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AVGV drawdown since its inception was -17.03%, smaller than the maximum WBIF drawdown of -20.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AVGV and WBIF.

Drawdown Indicators

	AVGV	WBIF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.03%	-20.29%	+3.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.12%	-6.60%	-1.52%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.16%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.29%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-20.29%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.48%	-0.97%	+0.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.30%	-7.74%	+5.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.07%	1.84%	+0.23%

Volatility

AVGV vs. WBIF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Avantis ALL Equity Markets Value ETF (AVGV) is 3.66%, while WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF) has a volatility of 4.13%. This indicates that AVGV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than WBIF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AVGV	WBIF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.66%	4.13%	-0.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.86%	8.63%	+1.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.94%	12.31%	+0.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.97%	12.86%	+2.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.97%	12.34%	+2.63%

AVGV vs. WBIF - Expense Ratio Comparison

AVGV has a 0.26% expense ratio, which is lower than WBIF's 1.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

AVGV vs. WBIF - Dividend Comparison

AVGV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.89%, more than WBIF's 0.06% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
AVGV Avantis ALL Equity Markets Value ETF	1.89%	1.98%	2.32%	1.14%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
WBIF WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF	0.06%	0.14%	1.17%	0.82%	0.96%	2.59%	0.09%	1.04%	0.77%	0.75%	0.67%	0.86%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AVGV and WBIF in my portfolio?

AVGV and WBIF have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AVGV or WBIF?

WBIF has higher volatility (4.13%) compared to AVGV (3.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AVGV dropped -17.03% vs WBIF's -20.29%.

Which ETF is better, AVGV or WBIF?

On 1-year performance, AVGV leads with 36.52% vs 23.01% for WBIF. On fees, AVGV is cheaper at 0.26% per year. On volatility, AVGV has been the lower-risk option at 3.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AVGV or WBIF?

Over the 1-year period, AVGV has performed better with a 36.52% return vs 23.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AVGV or WBIF?

AVGV is cheaper with a 0.26% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for WBIF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AVGV or WBIF?

AVGV has the higher dividend yield at 1.89%, compared with 0.06% for WBIF.

What is the main difference between AVGV and WBIF?

They also come from different issuers: Avantis and WBI. Their fees differ too: 0.26% for AVGV and 1.25% for WBIF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AVGV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.84 vs 1.88), 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.