CSIO vs. WBIF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CSIO (Cohen & Steers Infrastructure Opportunities Active ETF) and WBIF (WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF) are both Global Equities funds. Both are actively managed. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CSIO charges 0.65%/yr vs 1.25%/yr for WBIF.

Performance

CSIO vs. WBIF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cohen & Steers Infrastructure Opportunities Active ETF (CSIO) 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, CSIO achieves a 13.87% return, which is significantly higher than WBIF's 11.61% return.

CSIO

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: -1.46%
• YTD: 13.87%
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 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)

CSIO vs. WBIF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CSIO Cohen & Steers Infrastructure Opportunities Active ETF	13.87%	-0.11%
WBIF WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF	11.61%	-1.28%

Correlation

The correlation between CSIO and WBIF is 0.32, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 11, 2025	0.32

Return for Risk

CSIO vs. WBIF — Risk / Return Rank

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

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.

CSIO vs. WBIF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cohen & Steers Infrastructure Opportunities Active ETF (CSIO) 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CSIO	WBIF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	1.88	—
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	2.73	0.30	+2.43

Drawdowns

CSIO vs. WBIF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSIO drawdown since its inception was -5.86%, smaller than the maximum WBIF drawdown of -20.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSIO and WBIF.

Drawdown Indicators

	CSIO	WBIF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.86%	-20.29%	+14.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-6.60%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.16%	—
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	-2.10%	-0.97%	-1.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.12%	-7.74%	+6.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	1.84%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CSIO	WBIF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	4.13%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	8.63%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.54%	12.31%	-0.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.54%	12.86%	-1.32%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.54%	12.34%	-0.80%

CSIO vs. WBIF - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSIO has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than WBIF's 1.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

CSIO vs. WBIF - Dividend Comparison

CSIO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.66%, more than WBIF's 0.06% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CSIO Cohen & Steers Infrastructure Opportunities Active ETF	0.66%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	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 CSIO and WBIF in my portfolio?

CSIO and WBIF have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CSIO or WBIF?

On fees, CSIO is cheaper at 0.65% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CSIO or WBIF?

CSIO is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for WBIF.

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

CSIO has the higher dividend yield at 0.66%, compared with 0.06% for WBIF.

What is the main difference between CSIO and WBIF?

They also come from different issuers: Cohen & Steers and WBI. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for CSIO and 1.25% for WBIF.