LEAD vs. BIBL

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

LEAD (Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF) and BIBL (Inspire 100 ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - LEAD tracks the Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend Index while BIBL tracks the Inspire 100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, LEAD returned 11.97%/yr vs 10.30%/yr for BIBL. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. LEAD charges 0.43%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for BIBL.

Performance

LEAD vs. BIBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD) and Inspire 100 ETF (BIBL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LEAD achieves a 15.50% return, which is significantly lower than BIBL's 24.57% return.

LEAD

• 1D: -2.75%
• 1M: 3.28%
• YTD: 15.50%
• 6M: 13.95%
• 1Y: 26.47%
• 3Y*: 18.63%
• 5Y*: 11.97%
• 10Y*: 14.89%

BIBL

• 1D: -2.18%
• 1M: 4.42%
• YTD: 24.57%
• 6M: 23.10%
• 1Y: 40.13%
• 3Y*: 22.41%
• 5Y*: 10.30%
• 10Y*: —

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

LEAD vs. BIBL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
LEAD Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF	15.50%	15.52%	10.32%	26.25%	-18.16%	29.69%	23.41%	33.75%	-6.63%	7.07%
BIBL Inspire 100 ETF	24.57%	17.27%	12.49%	17.87%	-23.26%	27.44%	22.62%	29.68%	-7.64%	4.42%

Correlation

The correlation between LEAD and BIBL is 0.89, 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	0.89
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 31, 2017	0.91

The correlation between LEAD and BIBL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

LEAD vs. BIBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LEAD	BIBL
Technology	38.4%	31.9%
Industrials	31.9%	27.2%
Financial Services	17.0%	8.5%
Healthcare	6.1%	4.1%
Consumer Defensive	3.8%	0.4%
Consumer Cyclical	1.4%	0.3%
Energy	1.4%	6.0%
Communication Services	0.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	4.3%
Real Estate	-	13.7%
Utilities	-	3.3%

Return for Risk

LEAD vs. BIBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

LEAD

LEAD Risk / Return Rank: 60
LEAD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
LEAD Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
LEAD Omega Ratio Rank: 51
LEAD Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
LEAD Martin Ratio Rank: 74

BIBL

BIBL Risk / Return Rank: 82
BIBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
BIBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
BIBL Omega Ratio Rank: 76
BIBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
BIBL Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

LEAD vs. BIBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD) 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.

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.

	LEAD	BIBL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.72	2.45	-0.73
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.37	3.25	-0.88
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.42	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.08	4.51	-1.43
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.99	19.18	-6.19

LEAD vs. BIBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LEAD Sharpe Ratio is 1.72, which is comparable to the BIBL Sharpe Ratio of 2.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LEAD and BIBL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

LEAD vs. BIBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LEAD drawdown since its inception was -32.19%, smaller than the maximum BIBL drawdown of -36.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LEAD and BIBL.

Drawdown Indicators

	LEAD	BIBL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.19%	-36.12%	+3.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.65%	-8.94%	+0.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.86%	-20.60%	+2.74%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.93%	-30.85%	+5.92%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.19%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.75%	-2.18%	-0.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.41%	-7.00%	+2.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.04%	2.10%	-0.06%

Volatility

LEAD vs. BIBL - Volatility Comparison

Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD) and Inspire 100 ETF (BIBL) have volatilities of 6.66% and 6.91%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LEAD	BIBL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.66%	6.91%	-0.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.50%	13.67%	-1.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.50%	16.47%	-0.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.53%	19.76%	-2.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.73%	21.11%	-2.38%

LEAD vs. BIBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

LEAD has a 0.43% expense ratio, which is higher than BIBL's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

LEAD vs. BIBL - Dividend Comparison

LEAD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%, less than BIBL's 0.95% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
BIBL Inspire 100 ETF	0.95%	1.01%	0.92%	1.02%	0.98%	17.87%	1.67%	1.30%	1.49%	0.31%	0.00%
LEAD Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF	0.58%	0.70%	0.93%	1.13%	1.27%	1.79%	0.81%	1.32%	1.38%	0.97%	1.38%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LEAD and BIBL in my portfolio?

LEAD and BIBL have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LEAD or BIBL?

BIBL has higher volatility (6.91%) compared to LEAD (6.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LEAD dropped -32.19% vs BIBL's -36.12%.

Which ETF is better, LEAD or BIBL?

On 5-year performance, LEAD leads with 11.97% vs 10.30% for BIBL. On fees, BIBL is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, LEAD has been the lower-risk option at 6.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LEAD or BIBL?

Over the 5-year period, LEAD has performed better with a 11.97% return vs 10.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LEAD or BIBL?

BIBL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.43% for LEAD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LEAD or BIBL?

BIBL has the higher dividend yield at 0.95%, compared with 0.58% for LEAD.

What is the main difference between LEAD and BIBL?

LEAD tracks Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend Index, while BIBL tracks Inspire 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: SRN Advisors and Inspire. Their fees differ too: 0.43% for LEAD and 0.35% for BIBL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BIBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.45 vs 1.72), 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.