BLDG vs. RWR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BLDG (Cambria Global Real Estate ETF) and RWR (SPDR Dow Jones REIT ETF) are both REIT funds. BLDG is actively managed, while RWR is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BLDG returned 2.99%/yr vs 4.96%/yr for RWR. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BLDG charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for RWR.

Performance

BLDG vs. RWR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cambria Global Real Estate ETF (BLDG) and SPDR Dow Jones REIT ETF (RWR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BLDG achieves a 9.76% return, which is significantly lower than RWR's 16.14% return.

BLDG

• 1D: 0.65%
• 1M: 1.97%
• YTD: 9.76%
• 6M: 10.36%
• 1Y: 11.23%
• 3Y*: 11.02%
• 5Y*: 2.99%
• 10Y*: —

RWR

• 1D: 1.31%
• 1M: 1.96%
• YTD: 16.14%
• 6M: 16.59%
• 1Y: 19.02%
• 3Y*: 13.63%
• 5Y*: 4.96%
• 10Y*: 5.51%

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

BLDG vs. RWR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BLDG Cambria Global Real Estate ETF	9.76%	4.26%	8.18%	1.76%	-14.66%	22.47%	15.25%
RWR SPDR Dow Jones REIT ETF	16.14%	3.20%	7.74%	13.76%	-26.09%	45.47%	17.42%

Correlation

The correlation between BLDG and RWR is 0.79, 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	0.79
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2020	0.86

The correlation between BLDG and RWR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BLDG vs. RWR — Risk / Return Rank

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

BLDG

BLDG Risk / Return Rank: 27
BLDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
BLDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
BLDG Omega Ratio Rank: 26
BLDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
BLDG Martin Ratio Rank: 29

RWR

RWR Risk / Return Rank: 43
RWR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
RWR Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
RWR Omega Ratio Rank: 37
RWR Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
RWR Martin Ratio Rank: 50

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.

BLDG vs. RWR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cambria Global Real Estate ETF (BLDG) and SPDR Dow Jones REIT ETF (RWR). 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.

	BLDG	RWR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.98	1.37	-0.39
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.39	1.89	-0.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.24	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.12	2.38	-1.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.92	8.03	-4.11

BLDG vs. RWR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BLDG Sharpe Ratio is 0.98, which is comparable to the RWR Sharpe Ratio of 1.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BLDG and RWR, 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

BLDG vs. RWR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BLDG drawdown since its inception was -27.25%, smaller than the maximum RWR drawdown of -74.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BLDG and RWR.

Drawdown Indicators

	BLDG	RWR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.25%	-74.92%	+47.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.08%	-8.04%	-2.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.57%	-18.85%	+0.28%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.25%	-32.58%	+5.33%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-44.39%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.83%	-0.46%	-1.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.15%	-13.08%	+3.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.87%	2.38%	+0.49%

Volatility

BLDG vs. RWR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Cambria Global Real Estate ETF (BLDG) is 4.60%, while SPDR Dow Jones REIT ETF (RWR) has a volatility of 5.42%. This indicates that BLDG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RWR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BLDG	RWR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.60%	5.42%	-0.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.05%	10.37%	-1.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.61%	14.05%	-2.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.28%	19.05%	-3.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.56%	21.55%	-5.99%

BLDG vs. RWR - Expense Ratio Comparison

BLDG has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than RWR's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

BLDG vs. RWR - Dividend Comparison

BLDG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.35%, more than RWR's 3.36% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BLDG Cambria Global Real Estate ETF	5.35%	7.46%	7.97%	4.99%	3.99%	10.40%	0.59%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RWR SPDR Dow Jones REIT ETF	3.36%	3.78%	3.76%	3.75%	3.81%	2.79%	3.73%	3.36%	4.19%	3.05%	4.39%	3.17%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BLDG and RWR in my portfolio?

BLDG and RWR have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BLDG or RWR?

RWR has higher volatility (5.42%) compared to BLDG (4.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BLDG dropped -27.25% vs RWR's -74.92%.

Which ETF is better, BLDG or RWR?

On 5-year performance, RWR leads with 4.96% vs 2.99% for BLDG. On fees, RWR is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, BLDG has been the lower-risk option at 4.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BLDG or RWR?

Over the 5-year period, RWR has performed better with a 4.96% return vs 2.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BLDG or RWR?

RWR is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for BLDG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BLDG or RWR?

BLDG has the higher dividend yield at 5.35%, compared with 3.36% for RWR.

What is the main difference between BLDG and RWR?

They also come from different issuers: Cambria and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for BLDG and 0.25% for RWR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RWR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.37 vs 0.97), 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.