GFLW vs. BIBL
GFLW (VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF) and BIBL (Inspire 100 ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - GFLW tracks the Victory Free Cash Flow Growth Index while BIBL tracks the Inspire 100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, GFLW returned 30.36% vs 40.34% for BIBL. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GFLW charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for BIBL.
Performance
GFLW vs. BIBL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GFLW achieves a 16.78% return, which is significantly lower than BIBL's 23.84% return.
GFLW
- 1D
- 0.09%
- 1M
- 10.78%
- YTD
- 16.78%
- 6M
- 15.86%
- 1Y
- 30.36%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BIBL
- 1D
- 0.42%
- 1M
- 5.68%
- YTD
- 23.84%
- 6M
- 22.77%
- 1Y
- 40.34%
- 3Y*
- 22.20%
- 5Y*
- 10.11%
- 10Y*
- —
GFLW vs. BIBL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
GFLW VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF | 16.78% | 18.40% | -6.12% |
BIBL Inspire 100 ETF | 23.84% | 17.27% | -7.34% |
Correlation
The correlation between GFLW 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 5, 2024 | 0.78 |
The correlation between GFLW and BIBL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
GFLW vs. BIBL — Risk / Return Rank
GFLW
BIBL
GFLW vs. BIBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF (GFLW) 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.
| GFLW | BIBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.58 | 2.62 | -1.04 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.17 | 3.53 | -1.35 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.45 | -0.18 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.09 | 4.53 | -2.44 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.12 | 19.63 | -12.51 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GFLW | BIBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.58 | 2.62 | -1.04 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.52 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.79 | 0.63 | +0.16 |
Drawdowns
GFLW vs. BIBL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GFLW drawdown since its inception was -24.14%, smaller than the maximum BIBL drawdown of -36.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GFLW and BIBL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GFLW | BIBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.14% | -36.12% | +11.98% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.95% | -8.94% | -6.01% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -20.60% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -30.85% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.65% | -7.04% | +2.39% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.39% | 2.06% | +2.33% |
Volatility
GFLW vs. BIBL - Volatility Comparison
VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF (GFLW) has a higher volatility of 5.40% compared to Inspire 100 ETF (BIBL) at 4.62%. This indicates that GFLW'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GFLW | BIBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.40% | 4.62% | +0.78% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.97% | 12.63% | +2.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.31% | 15.47% | +3.84% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.60% | 19.59% | +5.01% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.60% | 21.08% | +3.52% |
GFLW vs. BIBL - Expense Ratio Comparison
GFLW has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than BIBL's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
GFLW vs. BIBL - Dividend Comparison
GFLW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%, 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% |
GFLW VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF | 0.01% | 0.02% | 0.01% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GFLW 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.
GFLW has higher volatility (5.40%) compared to BIBL (4.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GFLW dropped -24.14% vs BIBL's -36.12%.
On 1-year performance, BIBL leads with 40.34% vs 30.36% for GFLW. 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.
Over the 1-year period, BIBL has performed better with a 40.34% return vs 30.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BIBL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for GFLW.
BIBL has the higher dividend yield at 0.95%, compared with 0.01% for GFLW.
GFLW tracks Victory Free Cash Flow Growth Index, while BIBL tracks Inspire 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Victory and Inspire. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for GFLW and 0.35% for BIBL.
BIBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 vs 1.58), 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 GFLW and BIBL
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