PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CIBR.L vs. FTEU.L
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CIBR.L vs. FTEU.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Nasdaq Cybersecurity UCITS ETF Class A USD Accumulation (CIBR.L) and First Trust Eurozone AlphaDEX® UCITS ETF Class A Shares (FTEU.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CIBR.L achieves a 28.36% return, which is significantly higher than FTEU.L's 12.04% return.


CIBR.L

1D
-0.54%
1M
36.15%
YTD
28.36%
6M
26.26%
1Y
25.63%
3Y*
26.43%
5Y*
15.18%
10Y*

FTEU.L

1D
-0.50%
1M
1.54%
YTD
12.04%
6M
16.64%
1Y
33.03%
3Y*
25.45%
5Y*
10.52%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CIBR.L vs. FTEU.L - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
CIBR.L
First Trust Nasdaq Cybersecurity UCITS ETF Class A USD Accumulation
28.36%7.58%18.96%40.83%-27.53%19.58%35.46%
FTEU.L
First Trust Eurozone AlphaDEX® UCITS ETF Class A Shares
12.04%57.74%2.77%16.49%-18.83%11.78%25.26%

Correlation

The correlation between CIBR.L and FTEU.L is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.31

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.41

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.48

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 3, 2020

0.47

The correlation between CIBR.L and FTEU.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.31 (1 year) to 0.48 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CIBR.L vs. FTEU.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CIBR.L
FTEU.L

Technology

95.6%
6.0%

Communication Services

2.6%
3.7%

Industrials

1.8%
27.4%

Basic Materials

-

7.5%

Consumer Cyclical

-

9.2%

Consumer Defensive

-

5.3%

Energy

-

10.8%

Financial Services

-

10.6%

Healthcare

-

5.2%

Real Estate

-

6.0%

Utilities

-

8.3%

Technology

CIBR.L
95.6%
FTEU.L
6.0%

Communication Services

CIBR.L
2.6%
FTEU.L
3.7%

Industrials

CIBR.L
1.8%
FTEU.L
27.4%

Basic Materials

CIBR.L

-

FTEU.L
7.5%

Consumer Cyclical

CIBR.L

-

FTEU.L
9.2%

Consumer Defensive

CIBR.L

-

FTEU.L
5.3%

Energy

CIBR.L

-

FTEU.L
10.8%

Financial Services

CIBR.L

-

FTEU.L
10.6%

Healthcare

CIBR.L

-

FTEU.L
5.2%

Real Estate

CIBR.L

-

FTEU.L
6.0%

Utilities

CIBR.L

-

FTEU.L
8.3%

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

CIBR.L vs. FTEU.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

CIBR.L
CIBR.L Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
CIBR.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CIBR.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
CIBR.L Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
CIBR.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
CIBR.L Martin Ratio Rank: 2121
Martin Ratio Rank

FTEU.L
FTEU.L Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
FTEU.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FTEU.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
FTEU.L Omega Ratio Rank: 5959
Omega Ratio Rank
FTEU.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
FTEU.L Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CIBR.L vs. FTEU.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Nasdaq Cybersecurity UCITS ETF Class A USD Accumulation (CIBR.L) and First Trust Eurozone AlphaDEX® UCITS ETF Class A Shares (FTEU.L). 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.


CIBR.LFTEU.LDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.89

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.08

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.21

1.36

-0.15

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.10

2.88

-1.78

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.54

10.18

-7.64

CIBR.L vs. FTEU.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CIBR.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.02, which is lower than the FTEU.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CIBR.L and FTEU.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CIBR.LFTEU.LDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.02

1.92

-0.89

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.63

0.52

+0.11

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.76

0.54

+0.21

Drawdowns

CIBR.L vs. FTEU.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CIBR.L drawdown since its inception was -33.69%, smaller than the maximum FTEU.L drawdown of -46.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CIBR.L and FTEU.L.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CIBR.LFTEU.LDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.69%

-46.61%

+12.92%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-23.23%

-11.42%

-11.81%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.42%

-15.66%

-7.76%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-33.69%

-38.49%

+4.80%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.74%

-1.28%

+0.54%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.62%

-10.34%

-0.28%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

10.05%

3.24%

+6.81%

Volatility

CIBR.L vs. FTEU.L - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Nasdaq Cybersecurity UCITS ETF Class A USD Accumulation (CIBR.L) has a higher volatility of 11.38% compared to First Trust Eurozone AlphaDEX® UCITS ETF Class A Shares (FTEU.L) at 5.54%. This indicates that CIBR.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FTEU.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CIBR.LFTEU.LDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

11.38%

5.54%

+5.84%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

21.81%

14.10%

+7.71%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

24.92%

17.16%

+7.76%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

24.15%

20.22%

+3.93%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

24.17%

19.86%

+4.31%

CIBR.L vs. FTEU.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

CIBR.L has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than FTEU.L's 0.80% expense ratio.


Dividends

CIBR.L vs. FTEU.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither CIBR.L nor FTEU.L has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


CIBR.L and FTEU.L have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, CIBR.L is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

CIBR.L is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for FTEU.L.

CIBR.L is categorized as Technology Equities, while FTEU.L is Europe Equities. CIBR.L tracks MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD, while FTEU.L tracks MSCI EMU NR EUR. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for CIBR.L and 0.80% for FTEU.L.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CIBR.L and FTEU.L

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