GPT vs. FWD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GPT (Intelligent Alpha Atlas ETF) and FWD (AB Disruptors ETF) are both Global Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, GPT returned 31.43% vs 75.95% for FWD. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GPT charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for FWD.

Performance

GPT vs. FWD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Intelligent Alpha Atlas ETF (GPT) 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, GPT achieves a 12.68% return, which is significantly lower than FWD's 40.11% return.

GPT

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: 2.33%
• YTD: 12.68%
• 6M: 11.45%
• 1Y: 31.43%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 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)

GPT vs. FWD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GPT Intelligent Alpha Atlas ETF	12.68%	24.85%	-3.42%
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	40.11%	32.00%	6.94%

Correlation

The correlation between GPT and FWD is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 19, 2024	0.83

The correlation between GPT and FWD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GPT vs. FWD — Risk / Return Rank

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

GPT

GPT Risk / Return Rank: 60
GPT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
GPT Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
GPT Omega Ratio Rank: 53
GPT Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
GPT Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

GPT vs. FWD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Intelligent Alpha Atlas ETF (GPT) 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.

	GPT	FWD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.79	3.16	-1.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.50	3.78	-1.28
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.50	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.52	5.86	-2.34
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.47	20.83	-7.37
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GPT vs. FWD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GPT Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is lower than the FWD Sharpe Ratio of 3.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GPT 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

	GPT	FWD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.79	3.16	-1.37
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.96	1.67	-0.71

Drawdowns

GPT vs. FWD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GPT drawdown since its inception was -25.59%, smaller than the maximum FWD drawdown of -29.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GPT and FWD.

Drawdown Indicators

	GPT	FWD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.59%	-29.02%	+3.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.97%	-13.03%	+4.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-29.02%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.76%	-0.27%	-0.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.26%	-4.06%	-0.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.34%	3.66%	-1.32%

Volatility

GPT vs. FWD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Intelligent Alpha Atlas ETF (GPT) is 4.79%, while AB Disruptors ETF (FWD) has a volatility of 7.77%. This indicates that GPT 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

	GPT	FWD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.79%	7.77%	-2.98%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.45%	18.96%	-4.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.61%	24.15%	-6.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.69%	24.72%	-4.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.69%	24.72%	-4.03%

GPT vs. FWD - Expense Ratio Comparison

GPT has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than FWD's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

GPT vs. FWD - Dividend Comparison

GPT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.67%, more than FWD's 0.08% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	0.08%	0.11%	1.89%
GPT Intelligent Alpha Atlas ETF	0.67%	0.75%	0.19%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GPT and FWD in my portfolio?

GPT and FWD have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GPT or FWD?

FWD has higher volatility (7.77%) compared to GPT (4.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GPT dropped -25.59% vs FWD's -29.02%.

Which ETF is better, GPT or FWD?

On 1-year performance, FWD leads with 75.95% vs 31.43% for GPT. On fees, FWD is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, GPT has been the lower-risk option at 4.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GPT or FWD?

Over the 1-year period, FWD has performed better with a 75.95% return vs 31.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GPT or FWD?

FWD is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for GPT.

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

GPT has the higher dividend yield at 0.67%, compared with 0.08% for FWD.

What is the main difference between GPT and FWD?

They also come from different issuers: Intelligent Alpha and AllianceBernstein. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for GPT and 0.65% for FWD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FWD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.16 vs 1.79), 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.