FIW vs. CIBR
FIW (First Trust Water ETF) and CIBR (First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FIW is a Water Equities fund tracking the ISE Clean Edge Water Index, while CIBR is a Cybersecurity fund tracking the Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FIW returned 12.64%/yr vs 17.93%/yr for CIBR. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FIW charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CIBR.
Performance
FIW vs. CIBR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FIW achieves a -3.00% return, which is significantly lower than CIBR's 18.06% return. Over the past 10 years, FIW has underperformed CIBR with an annualized return of 12.64%, while CIBR has yielded a comparatively higher 17.93% annualized return.
FIW
- 1D
- -0.33%
- 1M
- 2.90%
- YTD
- -3.00%
- 6M
- -4.67%
- 1Y
- -1.15%
- 3Y*
- 7.63%
- 5Y*
- 5.63%
- 10Y*
- 12.64%
CIBR
- 1D
- 0.75%
- 1M
- -0.08%
- YTD
- 18.06%
- 6M
- 15.86%
- 1Y
- 15.20%
- 3Y*
- 24.74%
- 5Y*
- 12.80%
- 10Y*
- 17.93%
FIW vs. CIBR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FIW First Trust Water ETF | -3.00% | 7.20% | 8.38% | 20.35% | -15.70% | 32.00% | 21.15% | 37.37% | -9.23% | 24.69% |
CIBR First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF | 18.06% | 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 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.29 |
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 | 0.58 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 7, 2015 | 0.59 |
Over the past year, the correlation between FIW and CIBR has dropped to 0.29 - 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
Utilities
-
Healthcare
-
Technology
Basic Materials
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Communication Services
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Industrials
FIW
CIBR
Utilities
FIW
CIBR
-
Healthcare
FIW
CIBR
-
Technology
FIW
CIBR
Basic Materials
FIW
CIBR
-
Consumer Cyclical
FIW
CIBR
-
Consumer Defensive
FIW
CIBR
-
Communication Services
FIW
-
CIBR
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
FIW
CIBR
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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| FIW | CIBR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.68 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.99 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.00 | 1.12 | -0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.08 | 0.69 | -0.78 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.20 | 1.60 | -1.80 |
Loading charts...
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
| FIW | CIBR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -9.03% | -10.72% | +1.69% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.30% | -8.66% | +0.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.70% | 9.51% | -3.81% |
Volatility
FIW vs. CIBR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for First Trust Water ETF (FIW) is 4.68%, while First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR) has a volatility of 12.03%. 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
| FIW | CIBR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.68% | 12.03% | -7.35% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.92% | 21.54% | -9.62% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.78% | 25.21% | -9.43% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.39% | 25.07% | -6.68% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.89% | 23.60% | -3.71% |
FIW vs. CIBR - Expense Ratio Comparison
FIW has a 0.50% 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 0.78%, more than CIBR's 0.49% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CIBR First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF | 0.49% | 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 | 0.78% | 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 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CIBR has higher volatility (12.03%) compared to FIW (4.68%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FIW dropped -52.75% vs CIBR's -33.89%.
On 10-year performance, CIBR leads with 17.93% vs 12.64% for FIW. On fees, FIW is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, FIW has been the lower-risk option at 4.68%. 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 17.93% return vs 12.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FIW is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for CIBR.
FIW has the higher dividend yield at 0.78%, compared with 0.49% for CIBR.
FIW is categorized as Water Equities, while CIBR is Cybersecurity. FIW tracks ISE Clean Edge Water Index, while CIBR tracks Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FIW and 0.60% for CIBR.
CIBR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.61 vs -0.07), 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.
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