FLM vs. CIBR

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF (FLM) and First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR).

FLM and CIBR are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. FLM is a passively managed fund by First Trust that tracks the performance of the ISE Global Engineering & Construction Index. It was launched on Oct 13, 2008. CIBR is a passively managed fund by First Trust that tracks the performance of the Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index. It was launched on Jul 7, 2015. Both FLM and CIBR are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

FLM vs. CIBR - Performance Comparison

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

FLM vs. CIBR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FLM First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF	8.87%	13.99%	17.94%	19.36%	-9.87%	12.98%	0.51%	12.81%	-21.72%	22.95%
CIBR First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF	-12.12%	13.06%	18.21%	39.71%	-26.46%	19.67%	50.53%	28.52%	1.47%	18.61%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLM achieves a 8.87% return, which is significantly higher than CIBR's -12.12% return. Over the past 10 years, FLM has underperformed CIBR with an annualized return of 7.81%, while CIBR has yielded a comparatively higher 14.52% annualized return.

FLM

• 1D: 2.08%
• 1M: -4.71%
• YTD: 8.87%
• 6M: 8.11%
• 1Y: 24.93%
• 3Y*: 19.13%
• 5Y*: 9.29%
• 10Y*: 7.81%

CIBR

• 1D: 3.11%
• 1M: -0.19%
• YTD: -12.12%
• 6M: -17.17%
• 1Y: 0.06%
• 3Y*: 14.11%
• 5Y*: 8.62%
• 10Y*: 14.52%

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

FLM vs. CIBR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLM has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than CIBR's 0.60% expense ratio.

FLM

First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF

CIBR

First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF

Return for Risk

FLM vs. CIBR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLM

FLM Risk / Return Rank: 78
FLM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
FLM Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
FLM Omega Ratio Rank: 75
FLM Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
FLM Martin Ratio Rank: 84

CIBR

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

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.

FLM vs. CIBR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF (FLM) 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.

	FLM	CIBR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.41	0.00	+1.41
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.96	0.17	+1.79
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.02	+0.26
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.10	-0.03	+2.13
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.70	-0.07	+9.77
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FLM vs. CIBR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLM Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is higher than the CIBR Sharpe Ratio of 0.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLM and CIBR, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FLM	CIBR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.41	0.00	+1.41
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.56	0.36	+0.20
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.42	0.63	-0.21
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.36	0.51	-0.15

Correlation

The correlation between FLM and CIBR is 0.54, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

FLM vs. CIBR - Dividend Comparison

FLM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%, more than CIBR's 0.65% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLM First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF	1.12%	1.19%	1.31%	1.16%	2.10%	1.45%	2.88%	1.84%	1.74%	1.49%	2.01%	1.17%
CIBR First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF	0.65%	0.42%	0.29%	0.42%	0.31%	0.59%	1.10%	0.23%	0.23%	0.10%	0.77%	0.58%

Drawdowns

FLM vs. CIBR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLM drawdown since its inception was -50.07%, which is greater than CIBR's maximum drawdown of -33.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLM and CIBR.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLM	CIBR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-50.07%	-33.89%	-16.18%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.24%	-21.96%	+9.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.35%	-33.89%	+8.54%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-50.07%	-33.89%	-16.18%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.26%	-19.50%	+14.24%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.94%	-8.66%	-2.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.65%	8.02%	-5.37%

Volatility

FLM vs. CIBR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Global Engineering and Construction ETF (FLM) is 5.59%, while First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR) has a volatility of 7.04%. This indicates that FLM 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.

Volatility by Period

	FLM	CIBR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.59%	7.04%	-1.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.29%	16.45%	-6.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.71%	24.46%	-6.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.79%	24.21%	-7.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.74%	23.22%	-4.48%