PSET vs. BIBL

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

PSET (Principal Quality ETF) and BIBL (Inspire 100 ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - PSET tracks the NASDAQ US Price Setters while BIBL tracks the Inspire 100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PSET returned 8.13%/yr vs 10.29%/yr for BIBL. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PSET charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for BIBL.

Performance

PSET vs. BIBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Principal Quality ETF (PSET) 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, PSET achieves a -2.15% return, which is significantly lower than BIBL's 24.90% return.

PSET

• 1D: 0.49%
• 1M: -1.25%
• YTD: -2.15%
• 6M: -3.42%
• 1Y: 4.23%
• 3Y*: 11.59%
• 5Y*: 8.13%
• 10Y*: 12.55%

BIBL

• 1D: 0.27%
• 1M: 4.70%
• YTD: 24.90%
• 6M: 23.10%
• 1Y: 38.99%
• 3Y*: 22.52%
• 5Y*: 10.29%
• 10Y*: —

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

PSET vs. BIBL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
PSET Principal Quality ETF	-2.15%	7.27%	17.65%	24.07%	-16.52%	29.59%	16.20%	34.85%	-2.29%	4.74%
BIBL Inspire 100 ETF	24.90%	17.27%	12.49%	17.87%	-23.26%	27.44%	22.62%	29.68%	-7.64%	4.42%

Correlation

The correlation between PSET and BIBL is 0.74, 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	0.74
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.83
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 31, 2017	0.74

The correlation between PSET and BIBL shifts across timeframes, from 0.74 (1 year) to 0.86 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PSET vs. BIBL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PSET	BIBL
Technology	38.5%	31.9%
Industrials	19.0%	27.2%
Financial Services	13.8%	8.5%
Healthcare	10.8%	4.1%
Communication Services	6.6%	-
Consumer Cyclical	5.5%	0.3%
Basic Materials	3.3%	4.3%
Energy	1.4%	6.0%
Consumer Defensive	1.1%	0.4%
Real Estate	-	13.7%
Utilities	-	3.3%

Return for Risk

PSET vs. BIBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

PSET

PSET Risk / Return Rank: 13
PSET Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
PSET Sortino Ratio Rank: 13
PSET Omega Ratio Rank: 13
PSET Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
PSET Martin Ratio Rank: 14

BIBL

BIBL Risk / Return Rank: 84
BIBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
BIBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
BIBL Omega Ratio Rank: 78
BIBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
BIBL 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.

PSET vs. BIBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Principal Quality ETF (PSET) 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.

	PSET	BIBL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.33	2.39	-2.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.54	3.17	-2.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.41	-0.35
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.33	4.38	-4.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.08	18.61	-17.53

PSET vs. BIBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSET Sharpe Ratio is 0.33, which is lower than the BIBL Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSET 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

PSET vs. BIBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSET drawdown since its inception was -34.74%, roughly equal to the maximum BIBL drawdown of -36.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSET and BIBL.

Drawdown Indicators

	PSET	BIBL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.74%	-36.12%	+1.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.94%	-8.94%	-4.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.96%	-20.60%	-1.36%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.61%	-30.85%	+5.24%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.74%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.22%	-1.92%	-2.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.58%	-7.00%	+2.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.91%	2.10%	+1.81%

Volatility

PSET vs. BIBL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Principal Quality ETF (PSET) is 4.30%, while Inspire 100 ETF (BIBL) has a volatility of 6.81%. This indicates that PSET experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BIBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PSET	BIBL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.30%	6.81%	-2.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.23%	13.65%	-3.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.93%	16.44%	-3.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.58%	19.76%	-2.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.10%	21.11%	-3.01%

PSET vs. BIBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

PSET has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than BIBL's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

PSET vs. BIBL - Dividend Comparison

PSET's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.64%, less than BIBL's 0.94% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
BIBL Inspire 100 ETF	0.94%	1.01%	0.92%	1.02%	0.98%	17.87%	1.67%	1.30%	1.49%	0.31%	0.00%
PSET Principal Quality ETF	0.64%	0.59%	0.69%	0.85%	1.47%	0.89%	1.09%	1.52%	1.33%	1.02%	1.26%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PSET and BIBL in my portfolio?

PSET and BIBL have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PSET or BIBL?

BIBL has higher volatility (6.81%) compared to PSET (4.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSET dropped -34.74% vs BIBL's -36.12%.

Which ETF is better, PSET or BIBL?

On 5-year performance, BIBL leads with 10.29% vs 8.13% for PSET. On fees, PSET is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, PSET has been the lower-risk option at 4.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PSET or BIBL?

Over the 5-year period, BIBL has performed better with a 10.29% return vs 8.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PSET or BIBL?

PSET is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for BIBL.

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

BIBL has the higher dividend yield at 0.94%, compared with 0.64% for PSET.

What is the main difference between PSET and BIBL?

PSET tracks NASDAQ US Price Setters, while BIBL tracks Inspire 100 Index. They also come from different issuers: Principal and Inspire. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for PSET and 0.35% for BIBL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BIBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs 0.33), 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.