DWAW vs. BIBL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

DWAW (AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright FSM All Cap World ETF) and BIBL (Inspire 100 ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. DWAW is actively managed, while BIBL is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, DWAW returned 7.23%/yr vs 10.11%/yr for BIBL. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DWAW charges 1.24%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for BIBL.

Performance

DWAW vs. BIBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright FSM All Cap World ETF (DWAW) and Inspire 100 ETF (BIBL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DWAW achieves a 16.16% return, which is significantly lower than BIBL's 23.84% return.

DWAW

• 1D: -0.51%
• 1M: 8.96%
• YTD: 16.16%
• 6M: 17.44%
• 1Y: 27.21%
• 3Y*: 19.57%
• 5Y*: 7.23%
• 10Y*: —

BIBL

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: 5.68%
• YTD: 23.84%
• 6M: 22.77%
• 1Y: 40.34%
• 3Y*: 22.20%
• 5Y*: 10.11%
• 10Y*: —

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

DWAW vs. BIBL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
DWAW AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright FSM All Cap World ETF	16.16%	10.85%	18.48%	11.18%	-17.80%	3.49%	48.87%	-0.38%
BIBL Inspire 100 ETF	23.84%	17.27%	12.49%	17.87%	-23.26%	27.44%	22.62%	-0.30%

Correlation

The correlation between DWAW and BIBL is 0.76, 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	0.76
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 30, 2019	0.82

The correlation between DWAW and BIBL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

DWAW vs. BIBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DWAW	BIBL
Technology	29.1%	30.1%
Financial Services	20.0%	8.3%
Industrials	12.8%	26.8%
Consumer Cyclical	7.8%	0.3%
Healthcare	7.1%	4.3%
Communication Services	6.5%	-
Basic Materials	4.6%	4.2%
Consumer Defensive	4.0%	0.5%
Energy	3.7%	6.9%
Utilities	2.9%	3.5%
Real Estate	1.4%	14.7%

Return for Risk

DWAW vs. BIBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

DWAW

DWAW Risk / Return Rank: 52
DWAW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
DWAW Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
DWAW Omega Ratio Rank: 52
DWAW Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
DWAW Martin Ratio Rank: 55

BIBL

BIBL Risk / Return Rank: 81
BIBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
BIBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
BIBL Omega Ratio Rank: 75
BIBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
BIBL Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

DWAW vs. BIBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright FSM All Cap World ETF (DWAW) and Inspire 100 ETF (BIBL). 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.

	DWAW	BIBL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.76	2.62	-0.86
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.46	3.53	-1.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.45	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.36	4.53	-2.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.57	19.63	-10.06
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DWAW vs. BIBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DWAW Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is lower than the BIBL Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DWAW and BIBL, 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

	DWAW	BIBL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.76	2.62	-0.86
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.38	0.52	-0.14
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.56	0.63	-0.06

Drawdowns

DWAW vs. BIBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DWAW drawdown since its inception was -31.55%, smaller than the maximum BIBL drawdown of -36.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DWAW and BIBL.

Drawdown Indicators

	DWAW	BIBL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.55%	-36.12%	+4.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.58%	-8.94%	-2.64%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.91%	-20.60%	-2.31%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.43%	-30.85%	+2.42%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.51%	0.00%	-0.51%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.98%	-7.04%	-3.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.85%	2.06%	+0.79%

Volatility

DWAW vs. BIBL - Volatility Comparison

AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright FSM All Cap World ETF (DWAW) has a higher volatility of 5.42% compared to Inspire 100 ETF (BIBL) at 4.62%. This indicates that DWAW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BIBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DWAW	BIBL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.42%	4.62%	+0.80%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.97%	12.63%	+0.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.57%	15.47%	+0.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.13%	19.59%	-0.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.41%	21.08%	+1.33%

DWAW vs. BIBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

DWAW has a 1.24% expense ratio, which is higher than BIBL's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

DWAW vs. BIBL - Dividend Comparison

DWAW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.66%, less than BIBL's 0.95% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BIBL Inspire 100 ETF	0.95%	1.01%	0.92%	1.02%	0.98%	17.87%	1.67%	1.30%	1.49%	0.31%
DWAW AdvisorShares Dorsey Wright FSM All Cap World ETF	0.66%	0.76%	0.00%	1.70%	0.53%	1.45%	0.16%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DWAW and BIBL in my portfolio?

DWAW and BIBL have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DWAW or BIBL?

DWAW has higher volatility (5.42%) compared to BIBL (4.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DWAW dropped -31.55% vs BIBL's -36.12%.

Which ETF is better, DWAW or BIBL?

On 5-year performance, BIBL leads with 10.11% vs 7.23% for DWAW. On fees, BIBL is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, BIBL has been the lower-risk option at 4.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DWAW or BIBL?

Over the 5-year period, BIBL has performed better with a 10.11% return vs 7.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DWAW or BIBL?

BIBL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 1.24% for DWAW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DWAW or BIBL?

BIBL has the higher dividend yield at 0.95%, compared with 0.66% for DWAW.

What is the main difference between DWAW and BIBL?

They also come from different issuers: AdvisorShares and Inspire. Their fees differ too: 1.24% for DWAW and 0.35% for BIBL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BIBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 vs 1.76), 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.