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

Performance

FIW vs. CIBR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Water ETF (FIW) and First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FIW achieves a -3.78% return, which is significantly lower than CIBR's 28.52% return. Over the past 10 years, FIW has underperformed CIBR with an annualized return of 12.18%, while CIBR has yielded a comparatively higher 18.49% annualized return.


FIW

1D
0.28%
1M
-0.84%
YTD
-3.78%
6M
-6.34%
1Y
-2.02%
3Y*
7.84%
5Y*
5.36%
10Y*
12.18%

CIBR

1D
-2.81%
1M
31.43%
YTD
28.52%
6M
24.03%
1Y
25.78%
3Y*
28.32%
5Y*
16.28%
10Y*
18.49%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FIW vs. CIBR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FIW
First Trust Water ETF
-3.78%7.20%8.38%20.35%-15.70%32.00%21.15%37.37%-9.23%24.69%
CIBR
First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF
28.52%13.06%18.21%39.71%-26.46%19.67%50.53%28.52%1.47%18.61%

Correlation

The correlation between FIW and CIBR is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.30

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

0.48

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

0.58

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.59

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 8, 2015

0.59

Over the past year, the correlation between FIW and CIBR has dropped to 0.30 - well below their long-term average of 0.59, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

FIW vs. CIBR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FIW
CIBR

Industrials

54.1%
3.5%

Utilities

16.2%

-

Healthcare

8.1%

-

Technology

8.1%
94.0%

Basic Materials

5.4%

-

Consumer Cyclical

2.7%

-

Consumer Defensive

2.7%

-

Communication Services

-

2.6%

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Industrials

FIW
54.1%
CIBR
3.5%

Utilities

FIW
16.2%
CIBR

-

Healthcare

FIW
8.1%
CIBR

-

Technology

FIW
8.1%
CIBR
94.0%

Basic Materials

FIW
5.4%
CIBR

-

Consumer Cyclical

FIW
2.7%
CIBR

-

Consumer Defensive

FIW
2.7%
CIBR

-

Communication Services

FIW

-

CIBR
2.6%

Energy

FIW

-

CIBR

-

Financial Services

FIW

-

CIBR

-

Real Estate

FIW

-

CIBR

-

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

FIW vs. CIBR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FIW
FIW Risk / Return Rank: 77
Overall Rank
FIW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FIW Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
Sortino Ratio Rank
FIW Omega Ratio Rank: 77
Omega Ratio Rank
FIW Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
Calmar Ratio Rank
FIW Martin Ratio Rank: 77
Martin Ratio Rank

CIBR
CIBR Risk / Return Rank: 2626
Overall Rank
CIBR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2929
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CIBR Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
CIBR Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
CIBR Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
CIBR Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
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.

FIW vs. CIBR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Water ETF (FIW) and First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR). 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.


FIWCIBRDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

-0.13

1.06

-1.19

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

-0.08

1.56

-1.65

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

0.99

1.20

-0.21

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

-0.15

1.18

-1.32

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

-0.38

2.79

-3.17

FIW vs. CIBR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FIW Sharpe Ratio is -0.13, which is lower than the CIBR Sharpe Ratio of 1.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FIW and CIBR, 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


FIWCIBRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.13

1.06

-1.19

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.29

0.66

-0.36

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

0.79

-0.17

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.43

0.67

-0.23

Drawdowns

FIW vs. CIBR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FIW drawdown since its inception was -52.75%, which is greater than CIBR's maximum drawdown of -33.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FIW and CIBR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FIWCIBRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-52.75%

-33.89%

-18.86%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.81%

-21.99%

+8.18%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.32%

-21.99%

+3.67%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.53%

-33.89%

+5.36%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.60%

-33.89%

-2.71%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.76%

-2.81%

-6.95%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.30%

-8.66%

+0.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.33%

9.25%

-3.92%

Volatility

FIW vs. CIBR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Water ETF (FIW) is 4.45%, while First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR) has a volatility of 10.90%. This indicates that FIW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CIBR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FIWCIBRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.45%

10.90%

-6.45%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.42%

20.90%

-9.48%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.50%

24.50%

-9.00%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.35%

24.95%

-6.60%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.90%

23.60%

-3.70%

FIW vs. CIBR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FIW has a 0.54% expense ratio, which is lower than CIBR's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

FIW vs. CIBR - Dividend Comparison

FIW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.79%, more than CIBR's 0.45% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CIBR
First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF
0.45%0.42%0.29%0.42%0.31%0.59%1.10%0.23%0.23%0.10%0.77%0.58%
FIW
First Trust Water ETF
0.79%0.69%0.69%0.68%0.67%0.37%0.56%0.55%0.73%1.13%0.51%0.76%

Frequently Asked Questions


FIW and CIBR have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CIBR has higher volatility (10.90%) compared to FIW (4.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FIW dropped -52.75% vs CIBR's -33.89%.

On 10-year performance, CIBR leads with 18.49% vs 12.18% for FIW. On fees, FIW is cheaper at 0.54% per year. On volatility, FIW has been the lower-risk option at 4.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, CIBR has performed better with a 18.49% return vs 12.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FIW is cheaper with a 0.54% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CIBR.

FIW has the higher dividend yield at 0.79%, compared with 0.45% for CIBR.

FIW is categorized as Water Equities, while CIBR is Technology Equities. FIW tracks ISE Clean Edge Water Index, while CIBR tracks Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index. Their fees differ too: 0.54% for FIW and 0.60% for CIBR.

CIBR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.06 vs -0.13), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FIW and CIBR

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