CAPE vs. WBIF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CAPE (iPath Shiller CAPE ETN) and WBIF (WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF) are both Global Equities funds. CAPE is passively managed, while WBIF is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CAPE returned 12.19%/yr vs 8.85%/yr for WBIF. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CAPE charges 0.45%/yr vs 1.25%/yr for WBIF.

Performance

CAPE vs. WBIF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iPath Shiller CAPE ETN (CAPE) 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, CAPE achieves a -1.70% return, which is significantly lower than WBIF's 11.61% return.

CAPE

• 1D: -0.48%
• 1M: -1.99%
• YTD: -1.70%
• 6M: -1.38%
• 1Y: 3.29%
• 3Y*: 12.19%
• 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)

CAPE vs. WBIF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
CAPE iPath Shiller CAPE ETN	-1.70%	9.10%	14.40%	27.65%	-15.28%
WBIF WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF	11.61%	9.16%	3.43%	0.49%	-11.34%

Correlation

The correlation between CAPE and WBIF is 0.59, 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	0.59
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 5, 2022	0.69

The correlation between CAPE and WBIF shifts across timeframes, from 0.59 (1 year) to 0.70 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CAPE vs. WBIF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CAPE	WBIF
Consumer Defensive	25.9%	3.1%
Communication Services	25.2%	2.6%
Healthcare	25.0%	3.4%
Consumer Cyclical	24.8%	11.1%
Real Estate	24.7%	-
Financial Services	23.2%	31.0%
Basic Materials	22.0%	1.0%
Technology	0.2%	19.9%
Industrials	0.0%	14.6%
Energy	-	2.9%
Utilities	-	10.3%

Return for Risk

CAPE vs. WBIF — Risk / Return Rank

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

CAPE

CAPE Risk / Return Rank: 13
CAPE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
CAPE Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
CAPE Omega Ratio Rank: 12
CAPE Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
CAPE Martin Ratio Rank: 15

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.

CAPE vs. WBIF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iPath Shiller CAPE ETN (CAPE) 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.

	CAPE	WBIF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.30	1.88	-1.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.52	2.73	-2.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.34	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.34	3.50	-3.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.24	12.53	-11.29
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CAPE vs. WBIF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CAPE Sharpe Ratio is 0.30, which is lower than the WBIF Sharpe Ratio of 1.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CAPE 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

	CAPE	WBIF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.30	1.88	-1.58
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	0.42	0.30	+0.11

Drawdowns

CAPE vs. WBIF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CAPE drawdown since its inception was -22.07%, which is greater than WBIF's maximum drawdown of -20.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAPE and WBIF.

Drawdown Indicators

	CAPE	WBIF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.07%	-20.29%	-1.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.68%	-6.60%	-3.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.32%	-17.16%	+2.84%
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	-4.83%	-0.97%	-3.86%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.93%	-7.74%	+2.81%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.65%	1.84%	+0.81%

Volatility

CAPE vs. WBIF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iPath Shiller CAPE ETN (CAPE) is 2.63%, while WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF) has a volatility of 4.13%. This indicates that CAPE 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

	CAPE	WBIF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.63%	4.13%	-1.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.04%	8.63%	-0.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.89%	12.31%	-1.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.93%	12.86%	+4.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.93%	12.34%	+4.59%

CAPE vs. WBIF - Expense Ratio Comparison

CAPE has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than WBIF's 1.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

CAPE vs. WBIF - Dividend Comparison

CAPE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.41%, more than WBIF's 0.06% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CAPE iPath Shiller CAPE ETN	1.41%	1.39%	1.23%	1.01%	0.80%	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 CAPE and WBIF in my portfolio?

CAPE and WBIF have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CAPE or WBIF?

WBIF has higher volatility (4.13%) compared to CAPE (2.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CAPE dropped -22.07% vs WBIF's -20.29%.

Which ETF is better, CAPE or WBIF?

On 3-year performance, CAPE leads with 12.19% vs 8.85% for WBIF. On fees, CAPE is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, CAPE has been the lower-risk option at 2.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CAPE or WBIF?

Over the 3-year period, CAPE has performed better with a 12.19% return vs 8.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CAPE or WBIF?

CAPE is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for WBIF.

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

CAPE has the higher dividend yield at 1.41%, compared with 0.06% for WBIF.

What is the main difference between CAPE and WBIF?

They also come from different issuers: Barclays Capital and WBI. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for CAPE and 1.25% for WBIF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

WBIF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.88 vs 0.30), 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.