RWLC vs. BPH

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RWLC (Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen US Large Cap Equity ETF) and BPH (BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RWLC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the S&P 500, while BPH is a Oil & Gas fund actively managed by Precidian. RWLC is passively managed, while BPH is actively managed. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RWLC charges 0.32%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for BPH.

Performance

RWLC vs. BPH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen US Large Cap Equity ETF (RWLC) and BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF (BPH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

RWLC

• 1D: -0.44%
• 1M: 6.22%
• YTD: 12.91%
• 6M: 15.36%
• 1Y: 21.97%
• 3Y*: 24.01%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BPH

• 1D: 1.20%
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RWLC vs. BPH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
RWLC Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen US Large Cap Equity ETF	0.77%
BPH BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF	2.83%

Correlation

The correlation between RWLC and BPH is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 27, 2026	0.20

RWLC vs. BPH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RWLC	BPH
Technology	27.9%	-
Financial Services	15.7%	-
Healthcare	11.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	11.2%	-
Communication Services	9.7%	-
Consumer Defensive	6.8%	-
Energy	6.6%	100.0%
Industrials	5.6%	-
Basic Materials	2.2%	-
Utilities	1.9%	-
Real Estate	0.7%	-

Return for Risk

RWLC vs. BPH — Risk / Return Rank

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

RWLC

RWLC Risk / Return Rank: 49
RWLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
RWLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
RWLC Omega Ratio Rank: 47
RWLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
RWLC Martin Ratio Rank: 52

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.

RWLC vs. BPH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen US Large Cap Equity ETF (RWLC) and BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF (BPH). 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.

	RWLC	BPH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.59	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.39	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.36	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.78	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RWLC	BPH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.59	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.85	9.48	-8.63

Drawdowns

RWLC vs. BPH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWLC drawdown since its inception was -21.00%, which is greater than BPH's maximum drawdown of -2.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWLC and BPH.

Drawdown Indicators

	RWLC	BPH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.00%	-2.35%	-18.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.33%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.20%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.44%	0.00%	-0.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.43%	-1.08%	-4.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.51%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	RWLC	BPH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.66%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.97%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.88%	25.75%	-11.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.48%	25.75%	-9.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.48%	25.75%	-9.27%

RWLC vs. BPH - Expense Ratio Comparison

RWLC has a 0.32% expense ratio, which is higher than BPH's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

RWLC vs. BPH - Dividend Comparison

RWLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.01%, while BPH has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BPH BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
RWLC Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen US Large Cap Equity ETF	13.01%	14.69%	0.98%	1.63%	1.39%	0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RWLC and BPH in my portfolio?

RWLC and BPH have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, RWLC or BPH?

On fees, BPH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, RWLC or BPH?

BPH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.32% for RWLC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RWLC or BPH?

RWLC has the higher dividend yield at 13.01%, compared with 0.00% for BPH.

What is the main difference between RWLC and BPH?

RWLC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BPH is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Rayliant and Precidian. Their fees differ too: 0.32% for RWLC and 0.19% for BPH.