FICS vs. FWD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FICS (First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF) and FWD (AB Disruptors ETF) are both Global Equities funds. FICS is passively managed, while FWD is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FICS returned 9.67%/yr vs 39.48%/yr for FWD. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FICS charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for FWD.

Performance

FICS vs. FWD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF (FICS) and AB Disruptors ETF (FWD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FICS achieves a 0.83% return, which is significantly lower than FWD's 40.11% return.

FICS

• 1D: -0.83%
• 1M: 1.05%
• YTD: 0.83%
• 6M: 3.51%
• 1Y: 3.46%
• 3Y*: 9.67%
• 5Y*: 4.92%
• 10Y*: —

FWD

• 1D: -0.27%
• 1M: 14.15%
• YTD: 40.11%
• 6M: 39.78%
• 1Y: 75.95%
• 3Y*: 39.48%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FICS vs. FWD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FICS First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF	0.83%	20.44%	2.59%	11.95%
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	40.11%	32.00%	29.23%	25.66%

Correlation

The correlation between FICS and FWD is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.44
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2023	0.51

The correlation between FICS and FWD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.44 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.

FICS vs. FWD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FICS	FWD
Financial Services	28.5%	0.5%
Industrials	27.8%	17.7%
Consumer Defensive	14.2%	0.8%
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	2.4%
Healthcare	9.7%	6.6%
Communication Services	4.0%	2.6%
Basic Materials	4.0%	1.8%
Energy	3.1%	2.6%
Technology	1.8%	52.6%
Real Estate	-	0.7%
Utilities	-	1.0%

Return for Risk

FICS vs. FWD — Risk / Return Rank

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

FICS

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

FWD

FWD Risk / Return Rank: 87
FWD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
FWD Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
FWD Omega Ratio Rank: 83
FWD Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
FWD Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

FICS vs. FWD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF (FICS) and AB Disruptors ETF (FWD). 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.

	FICS	FWD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.26	3.16	-2.90
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.47	3.78	-3.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.50	-0.45
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.34	5.86	-5.52
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.97	20.83	-19.87
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FICS vs. FWD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FICS Sharpe Ratio is 0.26, which is lower than the FWD Sharpe Ratio of 3.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FICS and FWD, 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

	FICS	FWD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.26	3.16	-2.90
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.29	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.42	1.67	-1.25

Drawdowns

FICS vs. FWD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FICS drawdown since its inception was -29.16%, roughly equal to the maximum FWD drawdown of -29.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FICS and FWD.

Drawdown Indicators

	FICS	FWD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.16%	-29.02%	-0.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.32%	-13.03%	+2.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.66%	-29.02%	+17.36%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.16%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.79%	-0.27%	-4.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.21%	-4.06%	-3.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.60%	3.66%	-0.06%

Volatility

FICS vs. FWD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF (FICS) is 4.53%, while AB Disruptors ETF (FWD) has a volatility of 7.77%. This indicates that FICS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FWD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FICS	FWD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.53%	7.77%	-3.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.73%	18.96%	-8.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.26%	24.15%	-10.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.20%	24.72%	-7.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.94%	24.72%	-7.78%

FICS vs. FWD - Expense Ratio Comparison

FICS has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than FWD's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

FICS vs. FWD - Dividend Comparison

FICS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.96%, more than FWD's 0.08% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FICS First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF	1.96%	1.85%	2.01%	1.02%	1.89%	1.26%
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	0.08%	0.11%	1.89%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FICS and FWD in my portfolio?

FICS and FWD have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FICS or FWD?

FWD has higher volatility (7.77%) compared to FICS (4.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FICS dropped -29.16% vs FWD's -29.02%.

Which ETF is better, FICS or FWD?

On 3-year performance, FWD leads with 39.48% vs 9.67% for FICS. On fees, FWD is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, FICS has been the lower-risk option at 4.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FICS or FWD?

Over the 3-year period, FWD has performed better with a 39.48% return vs 9.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FICS or FWD?

FWD is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for FICS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FICS or FWD?

FICS has the higher dividend yield at 1.96%, compared with 0.08% for FWD.

What is the main difference between FICS and FWD?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and AllianceBernstein. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for FICS and 0.65% for FWD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FWD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.16 vs 0.26), 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.