BEDZ vs. CWS

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BEDZ (AdvisorShares Hotel ETF) and CWS (AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BEDZ is a Consumer Discretionary Equities fund actively managed by AdvisorShares, while CWS is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by AdvisorShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, BEDZ returned 8.91%/yr vs 8.12%/yr for CWS. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BEDZ charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.77%/yr for CWS.

Performance

BEDZ vs. CWS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AdvisorShares Hotel ETF (BEDZ) and AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF (CWS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BEDZ achieves a 10.82% return, which is significantly higher than CWS's -2.08% return.

BEDZ

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: 9.56%
• YTD: 10.82%
• 6M: 8.96%
• 1Y: 24.44%
• 3Y*: 16.30%
• 5Y*: 8.91%
• 10Y*: —

CWS

• 1D: -0.50%
• 1M: 0.14%
• YTD: -2.08%
• 6M: -3.85%
• 1Y: -1.44%
• 3Y*: 9.20%
• 5Y*: 8.12%
• 10Y*: —

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

BEDZ vs. CWS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BEDZ AdvisorShares Hotel ETF	10.82%	3.46%	18.31%	23.88%	-13.40%	7.95%
CWS AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF	-2.08%	6.43%	9.82%	25.06%	-10.42%	15.05%

Correlation

The correlation between BEDZ and CWS is 0.57, 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	0.57
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.62
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 21, 2021	0.59

The correlation between BEDZ and CWS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

BEDZ vs. CWS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BEDZ	CWS
Consumer Cyclical	52.0%	13.5%
Real Estate	38.2%	-
Industrials	3.9%	23.8%
Communication Services	1.5%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	4.3%
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	10.9%
Healthcare	-	24.2%
Technology	-	19.5%
Utilities	-	3.8%

Return for Risk

BEDZ vs. CWS — Risk / Return Rank

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

BEDZ

BEDZ Risk / Return Rank: 37
BEDZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
BEDZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
BEDZ Omega Ratio Rank: 33
BEDZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
BEDZ Martin Ratio Rank: 34

CWS

CWS Risk / Return Rank: 7
CWS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
CWS Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
CWS Omega Ratio Rank: 7
CWS Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
CWS Martin Ratio Rank: 8

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.

BEDZ vs. CWS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AdvisorShares Hotel ETF (BEDZ) and AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF (CWS). 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.

	BEDZ	CWS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.20	-0.11	+1.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.86	-0.06	+1.91
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	0.99	+0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.04	-0.12	+2.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.78	-0.30	+5.08

BEDZ vs. CWS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BEDZ Sharpe Ratio is 1.20, which is higher than the CWS Sharpe Ratio of -0.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BEDZ and CWS, 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

BEDZ vs. CWS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BEDZ drawdown since its inception was -29.70%, smaller than the maximum CWS drawdown of -33.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BEDZ and CWS.

Drawdown Indicators

	BEDZ	CWS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.70%	-33.82%	+4.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.06%	-11.92%	-0.14%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.31%	-16.56%	-11.75%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.70%	-24.87%	-4.83%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.92%	-6.49%	+5.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.00%	-4.55%	-3.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.13%	4.77%	+0.36%

Volatility

BEDZ vs. CWS - Volatility Comparison

AdvisorShares Hotel ETF (BEDZ) has a higher volatility of 4.98% compared to AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF (CWS) at 3.70%. This indicates that BEDZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CWS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BEDZ	CWS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.98%	3.70%	+1.28%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.25%	10.41%	+4.84%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.39%	13.48%	+6.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.89%	15.68%	+9.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.78%	16.89%	+7.89%

BEDZ vs. CWS - Expense Ratio Comparison

BEDZ has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than CWS's 0.77% expense ratio.

Dividends

BEDZ vs. CWS - Dividend Comparison

BEDZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.08%, more than CWS's 0.31% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
BEDZ AdvisorShares Hotel ETF	2.08%	2.31%	0.00%	1.67%	0.21%	0.36%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CWS AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF	0.31%	0.31%	0.59%	0.25%	0.50%	0.16%	0.27%	0.39%	2.07%	0.29%	0.03%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BEDZ and CWS in my portfolio?

BEDZ and CWS have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BEDZ or CWS?

BEDZ has higher volatility (4.98%) compared to CWS (3.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BEDZ dropped -29.70% vs CWS's -33.82%.

Which ETF is better, BEDZ or CWS?

On 5-year performance, BEDZ leads with 8.91% vs 8.12% for CWS. On fees, CWS is cheaper at 0.77% per year. On volatility, CWS has been the lower-risk option at 3.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BEDZ or CWS?

Over the 5-year period, BEDZ has performed better with a 8.91% return vs 8.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BEDZ or CWS?

CWS is cheaper with a 0.77% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for BEDZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BEDZ or CWS?

BEDZ has the higher dividend yield at 2.08%, compared with 0.31% for CWS.

What is the main difference between BEDZ and CWS?

BEDZ is categorized as Consumer Discretionary Equities, while CWS is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for BEDZ and 0.77% for CWS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BEDZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.20 vs -0.11), 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.