REK vs. BLDG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

REK (ProShares Short Real Estate) and BLDG (Cambria Global Real Estate ETF) are both REIT funds. REK is passively managed, while BLDG is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, REK returned -0.14%/yr vs 2.24%/yr for BLDG. At a correlation of -0.80, they often move in opposite directions. REK charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for BLDG.

Performance

REK vs. BLDG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Short Real Estate (REK) and Cambria Global Real Estate ETF (BLDG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, REK achieves a -6.58% return, which is significantly lower than BLDG's 5.95% return.

REK

• 1D: -0.49%
• 1M: 1.33%
• YTD: -6.58%
• 6M: -5.51%
• 1Y: -2.96%
• 3Y*: -3.69%
• 5Y*: -0.14%
• 10Y*: -6.20%

BLDG

• 1D: -0.93%
• 1M: 0.12%
• YTD: 5.95%
• 6M: 5.25%
• 1Y: 10.27%
• 3Y*: 8.73%
• 5Y*: 2.24%
• 10Y*: —

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

REK vs. BLDG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
REK ProShares Short Real Estate	-6.58%	2.35%	1.42%	-6.61%	29.17%	-30.58%	-11.37%
BLDG Cambria Global Real Estate ETF	5.95%	4.26%	8.18%	1.76%	-14.66%	22.47%	15.37%

Correlation

The correlation between REK and BLDG is -0.70, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.75
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2020	-0.80

The correlation between REK and BLDG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.80 to -0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

REK vs. BLDG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	REK	BLDG
Financial Services	46.7%	1.4%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	98.6%
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

REK vs. BLDG — Risk / Return Rank

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

REK

REK Risk / Return Rank: 6
REK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7
REK Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
REK Omega Ratio Rank: 6
REK Calmar Ratio Rank: 6
REK Martin Ratio Rank: 6

BLDG

BLDG Risk / Return Rank: 25
BLDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
BLDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
BLDG Omega Ratio Rank: 24
BLDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
BLDG Martin Ratio Rank: 26

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.

REK vs. BLDG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Short Real Estate (REK) and Cambria Global Real Estate ETF (BLDG). 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.

	REK	BLDG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.22	0.93	-1.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.23	1.35	-1.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.97	1.16	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.29	1.02	-1.31
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.67	3.60	-4.27
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

REK vs. BLDG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current REK Sharpe Ratio is -0.22, which is lower than the BLDG Sharpe Ratio of 0.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of REK and BLDG, 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

	REK	BLDG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.22	0.93	-1.15
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.01	0.15	-0.15
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	-0.31	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.49	0.45	-0.94

Drawdowns

REK vs. BLDG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum REK drawdown since its inception was -84.57%, which is greater than BLDG's maximum drawdown of -27.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for REK and BLDG.

Drawdown Indicators

	REK	BLDG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-84.57%	-27.25%	-57.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.23%	-10.08%	-0.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-26.93%	-18.57%	-8.36%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.93%	-27.25%	+0.32%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-58.67%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-81.95%	-2.76%	-79.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-64.08%	-9.23%	-54.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.42%	2.86%	+1.56%

Volatility

REK vs. BLDG - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Short Real Estate (REK) has a higher volatility of 3.91% compared to Cambria Global Real Estate ETF (BLDG) at 3.60%. This indicates that REK's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BLDG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	REK	BLDG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.91%	3.60%	+0.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.67%	8.23%	+1.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.42%	11.07%	+2.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.86%	15.26%	+3.60%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.30%	15.54%	+4.76%

REK vs. BLDG - Expense Ratio Comparison

REK has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than BLDG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

REK vs. BLDG - Dividend Comparison

REK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.27%, less than BLDG's 5.72% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BLDG Cambria Global Real Estate ETF	5.72%	7.46%	7.97%	4.99%	3.99%	10.40%	0.59%	0.00%	0.00%
REK ProShares Short Real Estate	3.27%	3.43%	6.22%	4.50%	0.48%	0.00%	0.07%	1.28%	0.43%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both REK and BLDG in my portfolio?

REK and BLDG have a correlation of -0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, REK or BLDG?

REK has higher volatility (3.91%) compared to BLDG (3.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, REK dropped -84.57% vs BLDG's -27.25%.

Which ETF is better, REK or BLDG?

On 5-year performance, BLDG leads with 2.24% vs -0.14% for REK. On fees, BLDG is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, BLDG has been the lower-risk option at 3.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, REK or BLDG?

Over the 5-year period, BLDG has performed better with a 2.24% return vs -0.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, REK or BLDG?

BLDG is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for REK.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, REK or BLDG?

BLDG has the higher dividend yield at 5.72%, compared with 3.27% for REK.

What is the main difference between REK and BLDG?

They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Cambria. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for REK and 0.59% for BLDG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BLDG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.93 vs -0.22), 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.