MVPA vs. WLDR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MVPA (Miller Value Partners Appreciation ETF) and WLDR (Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF) are both Global Equities funds. MVPA is actively managed, while WLDR is passively managed. Over the past year, MVPA returned -2.84% vs 57.12% for WLDR. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MVPA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.67%/yr for WLDR.

Performance

MVPA vs. WLDR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Miller Value Partners Appreciation ETF (MVPA) and Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF (WLDR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MVPA achieves a -2.87% return, which is significantly lower than WLDR's 29.55% return.

MVPA

• 1D: -1.85%
• 1M: -4.89%
• YTD: -2.87%
• 6M: -4.30%
• 1Y: -2.84%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

WLDR

• 1D: -1.18%
• 1M: 11.85%
• YTD: 29.55%
• 6M: 34.62%
• 1Y: 57.12%
• 3Y*: 32.72%
• 5Y*: 18.09%
• 10Y*: —

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

MVPA vs. WLDR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MVPA Miller Value Partners Appreciation ETF	-2.87%	-2.92%	40.69%
WLDR Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF	29.55%	31.24%	20.00%

Correlation

The correlation between MVPA and WLDR is 0.54, 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	0.54
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024	0.63

The correlation between MVPA and WLDR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

MVPA vs. WLDR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MVPA	WLDR
Consumer Cyclical	31.4%	6.2%
Financial Services	21.9%	13.4%
Industrials	14.4%	8.6%
Energy	12.4%	4.7%
Communication Services	6.4%	10.9%
Technology	5.3%	29.9%
Real Estate	3.7%	1.9%
Healthcare	2.5%	9.1%
Consumer Defensive	2.0%	9.1%
Basic Materials	-	3.5%
Utilities	-	2.7%

Return for Risk

MVPA vs. WLDR — Risk / Return Rank

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

MVPA

MVPA Risk / Return Rank: 7
MVPA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
MVPA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
MVPA Omega Ratio Rank: 7
MVPA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
MVPA Martin Ratio Rank: 7

WLDR

WLDR Risk / Return Rank: 94
WLDR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
WLDR Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
WLDR Omega Ratio Rank: 93
WLDR Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
WLDR Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

MVPA vs. WLDR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Miller Value Partners Appreciation ETF (MVPA) and Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF (WLDR). 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.

	MVPA	WLDR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.15	3.83	-3.98
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.09	5.08	-5.17
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.99	1.65	-0.66
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.19	6.48	-6.67
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.41	26.24	-26.65
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MVPA vs. WLDR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MVPA Sharpe Ratio is -0.15, which is lower than the WLDR Sharpe Ratio of 3.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MVPA and WLDR, 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

	MVPA	WLDR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.15	3.83	-3.98
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.06	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.56	0.60	-0.04

Drawdowns

MVPA vs. WLDR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MVPA drawdown since its inception was -25.91%, smaller than the maximum WLDR drawdown of -44.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MVPA and WLDR.

Drawdown Indicators

	MVPA	WLDR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.91%	-44.69%	+18.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.15%	-8.86%	-6.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-20.30%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-23.77%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.59%	-1.46%	-11.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.29%	-8.63%	+1.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	6.95%	2.18%	+4.77%

Volatility

MVPA vs. WLDR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Miller Value Partners Appreciation ETF (MVPA) is 4.54%, while Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF (WLDR) has a volatility of 5.63%. This indicates that MVPA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than WLDR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MVPA	WLDR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.54%	5.63%	-1.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.83%	12.11%	+1.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.66%	15.00%	+3.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.06%	17.22%	+5.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.06%	20.94%	+2.12%

MVPA vs. WLDR - Expense Ratio Comparison

MVPA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than WLDR's 0.67% expense ratio.

Dividends

MVPA vs. WLDR - Dividend Comparison

MVPA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.58%, less than WLDR's 7.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
MVPA Miller Value Partners Appreciation ETF	0.58%	0.56%	0.94%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
WLDR Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF	7.05%	9.01%	13.99%	2.28%	2.10%	7.55%	1.80%	2.48%	2.82%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MVPA and WLDR in my portfolio?

MVPA and WLDR have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MVPA or WLDR?

WLDR has higher volatility (5.63%) compared to MVPA (4.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MVPA dropped -25.91% vs WLDR's -44.69%.

Which ETF is better, MVPA or WLDR?

On 1-year performance, WLDR leads with 57.12% vs -2.84% for MVPA. On fees, MVPA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, MVPA has been the lower-risk option at 4.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MVPA or WLDR?

Over the 1-year period, WLDR has performed better with a 57.12% return vs -2.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MVPA or WLDR?

MVPA is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.67% for WLDR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MVPA or WLDR?

WLDR has the higher dividend yield at 7.05%, compared with 0.58% for MVPA.

What is the main difference between MVPA and WLDR?

They also come from different issuers: Miller and Regents Park Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for MVPA and 0.67% for WLDR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

WLDR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.83 vs -0.15), 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.