LENS vs. FWD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

LENS (Sarmaya Thematic ETF) and FWD (AB Disruptors ETF) are both Global Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LENS returned 61.82% vs 75.95% for FWD. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LENS charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for FWD.

Performance

LENS vs. FWD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) 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, LENS achieves a 13.33% return, which is significantly lower than FWD's 40.11% return.

LENS

• 1D: -1.54%
• 1M: -1.68%
• YTD: 13.33%
• 6M: 18.33%
• 1Y: 61.82%
• 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)

LENS vs. FWD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF	13.33%	56.21%
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	40.11%	25.55%

Correlation

The correlation between LENS and FWD is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2025	0.38

Return for Risk

LENS vs. FWD — Risk / Return Rank

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

LENS

LENS Risk / Return Rank: 67
LENS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
LENS Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
LENS Omega Ratio Rank: 68
LENS Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
LENS Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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.

LENS vs. FWD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) 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.

	LENS	FWD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.34	3.16	-0.82
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.70	3.78	-1.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.50	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.02	5.86	-1.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.02	20.83	-10.81
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LENS vs. FWD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LENS Sharpe Ratio is 2.34, which is comparable to the FWD Sharpe Ratio of 3.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LENS 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

	LENS	FWD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.34	3.16	-0.82
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.09	1.67	+0.42

Drawdowns

LENS vs. FWD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LENS drawdown since its inception was -15.47%, smaller than the maximum FWD drawdown of -29.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LENS and FWD.

Drawdown Indicators

	LENS	FWD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.47%	-29.02%	+13.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.47%	-13.03%	-2.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-29.02%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.64%	-0.27%	-13.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.71%	-4.06%	+0.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.19%	3.66%	+2.53%

Volatility

LENS vs. FWD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) is 6.16%, while AB Disruptors ETF (FWD) has a volatility of 7.77%. This indicates that LENS 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

	LENS	FWD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.16%	7.77%	-1.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.07%	18.96%	+3.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.54%	24.15%	+2.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.49%	24.72%	+0.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.49%	24.72%	+0.77%

LENS vs. FWD - Expense Ratio Comparison

LENS has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than FWD's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

LENS vs. FWD - Dividend Comparison

LENS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.41%, more than FWD's 0.08% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	0.08%	0.11%	1.89%
LENS Sarmaya Thematic ETF	1.41%	1.60%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LENS and FWD in my portfolio?

LENS and FWD have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LENS or FWD?

FWD has higher volatility (7.77%) compared to LENS (6.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LENS dropped -15.47% vs FWD's -29.02%.

Which ETF is better, LENS or FWD?

On 1-year performance, FWD leads with 75.95% vs 61.82% for LENS. On fees, FWD is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, LENS has been the lower-risk option at 6.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LENS or FWD?

Over the 1-year period, FWD has performed better with a 75.95% return vs 61.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LENS or FWD?

FWD is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for LENS.

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

LENS has the higher dividend yield at 1.41%, compared with 0.08% for FWD.

What is the main difference between LENS and FWD?

They also come from different issuers: Sarmaya Partners and AllianceBernstein. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for LENS and 0.65% for FWD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FWD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.16 vs 2.34), 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.