BBH vs. WNTR

Last updated Jul 12, 2026

BBH (VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF) and WNTR (YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BBH is a Health & Biotech Equities fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Biotech 25 Index, while WNTR is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by YieldMax. BBH is passively managed, while WNTR is actively managed. Over the past year, BBH returned 30.56% vs 116.49% for WNTR. At a correlation of -0.25, they often move in opposite directions. BBH charges 0.35%/yr vs 1.01%/yr for WNTR.

Performance

BBH vs. WNTR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF (BBH) and YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF (WNTR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BBH achieves a 8.60% return, which is significantly higher than WNTR's 8.06% return.

BBH

• 1D: -2.18%
• 1M: 9.59%
• 6M: 6.34%
• YTD: 8.60%
• 1Y: 30.56%
• 3Y*: 10.41%
• 5Y*: 1.01%
• 10Y*: 7.07%

WNTR

• 1D: -0.43%
• 1M: 15.85%
• 6M: 10.45%
• YTD: 8.06%
• 1Y: 116.49%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BBH vs. WNTR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BBH VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF	8.60%	19.69%
WNTR YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF	8.06%	52.78%

Correlation

The correlation between BBH and WNTR is -0.22, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.22
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 27, 2025	-0.25

Return for Risk

BBH vs. WNTR — Risk / Return Rank

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

BBH

BBH Risk / Return Rank: 54
BBH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
BBH Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
BBH Omega Ratio Rank: 48
BBH Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
BBH Martin Ratio Rank: 49

WNTR

WNTR Risk / Return Rank: 65
WNTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
WNTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
WNTR Omega Ratio Rank: 67
WNTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
WNTR Martin Ratio Rank: 49

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.

BBH vs. WNTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF (BBH) and YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF (WNTR). 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.

	BBH	WNTR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.43	2.06	-0.63
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.13	2.34	-0.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.32	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.69	2.60	+0.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.47	6.69	-0.22

BBH vs. WNTR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BBH Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is lower than the WNTR Sharpe Ratio of 2.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BBH and WNTR, 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

BBH vs. WNTR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BBH drawdown since its inception was -72.70%, which is greater than WNTR's maximum drawdown of -42.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BBH and WNTR.

Drawdown Indicators

	BBH	WNTR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-72.70%	-42.65%	-30.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.55%	-42.65%	+32.10%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.74%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.86%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-39.86%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.63%	-11.84%	+7.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-20.70%	-20.57%	-0.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.39%	16.58%	-12.19%

Volatility

BBH vs. WNTR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF (BBH) is 6.64%, while YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF (WNTR) has a volatility of 18.80%. This indicates that BBH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than WNTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BBH	WNTR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.64%	18.80%	-12.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.98%	47.57%	-32.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.81%	53.81%	-34.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.56%	53.62%	-32.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.10%	53.62%	-31.52%

BBH vs. WNTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

BBH has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than WNTR's 1.01% expense ratio.

Dividends

BBH vs. WNTR - Dividend Comparison

BBH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.47%, less than WNTR's 104.11% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BBH VanEck Vectors Biotech ETF	0.47%	0.51%	0.80%	0.43%	0.47%	0.21%	0.36%	0.34%	0.50%	0.55%	0.30%	0.27%
WNTR YieldMax Short MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF	104.11%	58.56%	0.00%	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 BBH and WNTR in my portfolio?

BBH and WNTR have a correlation of -0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BBH or WNTR?

WNTR has higher volatility (18.80%) compared to BBH (6.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BBH dropped -72.70% vs WNTR's -42.65%.

Which ETF is better, BBH or WNTR?

On 1-year performance, WNTR leads with 116.49% vs 30.56% for BBH. On fees, BBH is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, BBH has been the lower-risk option at 6.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BBH or WNTR?

Over the 1-year period, WNTR has performed better with a 116.49% return vs 30.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BBH or WNTR?

BBH is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for WNTR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BBH or WNTR?

WNTR has the higher dividend yield at 104.11%, compared with 0.47% for BBH.

What is the main difference between BBH and WNTR?

BBH is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while WNTR is Derivative Income. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and YieldMax. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for BBH and 1.01% for WNTR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

WNTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.06 vs 1.43), 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.