CIB0.DE vs. WELS.DE
CIB0.DE (VanEck Bionic Engineering UCITS ETF A) and WELS.DE (Amundi S&P Global Health Care ESG UCITS ETF EUR Acc) are both Health & Biotech Equities funds - CIB0.DE tracks the MVIS Global Bionic Healthcare ESG while WELS.DE tracks the S&P Developed Ex-Korea LargeMidCap Sustainability Enhanced Health Care. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, CIB0.DE returned -7.77%/yr vs 4.22%/yr for WELS.DE. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CIB0.DE charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for WELS.DE.
Performance
CIB0.DE vs. WELS.DE - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CIB0.DE achieves a -11.68% return, which is significantly lower than WELS.DE's -0.19% return.
CIB0.DE
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 2.50%
- YTD
- -11.68%
- 6M
- -11.71%
- 1Y
- -10.87%
- 3Y*
- -7.77%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
WELS.DE
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 4.35%
- YTD
- -0.19%
- 6M
- -0.07%
- 1Y
- 13.16%
- 3Y*
- 4.22%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CIB0.DE vs. WELS.DE - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CIB0.DE VanEck Bionic Engineering UCITS ETF A | -11.68% | -10.00% | 5.16% | 2.09% | -8.46% |
WELS.DE Amundi S&P Global Health Care ESG UCITS ETF EUR Acc | -0.19% | 1.05% | 7.20% | 2.33% | -3.91% |
Correlation
The correlation between CIB0.DE and WELS.DE 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 | 0.51 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 2, 2022 | 0.52 |
The correlation between CIB0.DE and WELS.DE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.51 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CIB0.DE vs. WELS.DE — Risk / Return Rank
CIB0.DE
WELS.DE
CIB0.DE vs. WELS.DE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Bionic Engineering UCITS ETF A (CIB0.DE) and Amundi S&P Global Health Care ESG UCITS ETF EUR Acc (WELS.DE). 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.
| CIB0.DE | WELS.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.51 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.22 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.91 | 1.16 | -0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.47 | 1.06 | -1.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.10 | 2.45 | -3.55 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CIB0.DE vs. WELS.DE - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CIB0.DE drawdown since its inception was -32.60%, which is greater than WELS.DE's maximum drawdown of -23.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIB0.DE and WELS.DE.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CIB0.DE | WELS.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.60% | -23.13% | -9.47% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -23.47% | -12.35% | -11.12% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -32.60% | -23.13% | -9.47% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -26.17% | -9.21% | -16.96% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.12% | -7.26% | -3.86% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.91% | 5.37% | +4.54% |
Volatility
CIB0.DE vs. WELS.DE - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Bionic Engineering UCITS ETF A (CIB0.DE) and Amundi S&P Global Health Care ESG UCITS ETF EUR Acc (WELS.DE) have volatilities of 5.47% and 5.31%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CIB0.DE | WELS.DE | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.47% | 5.31% | +0.16% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.99% | 10.65% | +2.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.33% | 14.90% | +2.43% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.05% | 13.72% | +4.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.05% | 13.72% | +4.33% |
CIB0.DE vs. WELS.DE - Expense Ratio Comparison
CIB0.DE has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than WELS.DE's 0.18% expense ratio.
Dividends
CIB0.DE vs. WELS.DE - Dividend Comparison
Neither CIB0.DE nor WELS.DE has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
CIB0.DE and WELS.DE 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.
On fees, WELS.DE is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
WELS.DE is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for CIB0.DE.
CIB0.DE tracks MVIS Global Bionic Healthcare ESG, while WELS.DE tracks S&P Developed Ex-Korea LargeMidCap Sustainability Enhanced Health Care. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Amundi. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for CIB0.DE and 0.18% for WELS.DE.
Find the right allocation for CIB0.DE and WELS.DE
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer