PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
RWR vs. BLDG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

RWR vs. BLDG

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

RWR (SPDR Dow Jones REIT ETF) and BLDG (Cambria Global Real Estate ETF) are both REIT funds. RWR is passively managed, while BLDG is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, RWR returned 4.44%/yr vs 2.40%/yr for BLDG. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RWR charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for BLDG.

Performance

RWR vs. BLDG - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RWR achieves a 12.61% return, which is significantly higher than BLDG's 6.82% return.

RWR

1D
1.38%
1M
0.75%
YTD
12.61%
6M
11.45%
1Y
16.94%
3Y*
11.72%
5Y*
4.44%
10Y*
5.39%

BLDG

1D
0.82%
1M
0.01%
YTD
6.82%
6M
6.29%
1Y
11.06%
3Y*
9.14%
5Y*
2.40%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RWR vs. BLDG - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
RWR
SPDR Dow Jones REIT ETF		12.61%3.20%7.74%13.76%-26.09%45.47%17.06%
BLDG
Cambria Global Real Estate ETF		6.82%4.26%8.18%1.76%-14.66%22.47%15.37%

Correlation

The correlation between RWR and BLDG is 0.79, 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

0.79

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.81

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 25, 2020

0.86

The correlation between RWR and BLDG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

RWR vs. BLDG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
RWR
BLDG

Real Estate

98.6%
98.6%

Financial Services

0.0%
1.4%

Utilities

0.0%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Technology

-

-

Real Estate

RWR
98.6%
BLDG
98.6%

Financial Services

RWR
0.0%
BLDG
1.4%

Utilities

RWR
0.0%
BLDG

-

Basic Materials

RWR

-

BLDG

-

Communication Services

RWR

-

BLDG

-

Consumer Cyclical

RWR

-

BLDG

-

Consumer Defensive

RWR

-

BLDG

-

Energy

RWR

-

BLDG

-

Healthcare

RWR

-

BLDG

-

Industrials

RWR

-

BLDG

-

Technology

RWR

-

BLDG

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

SPDR Dow Jones REIT ETF

Cambria Global Real Estate ETF

Often compared with RWR:
RWR vs. VNQRWR vs. SCHHRWR vs. FRIRWR vs. VOORWR vs. SPYRWR vs. VGSLXRWR vs. EUEA.AS
Often compared with BLDG:
BLDG vs. VNQBLDG vs. AVREBLDG vs. VNQIBLDG vs. REETBLDG vs. DFGRBLDG vs. RWXBLDG vs. SRET

Return for Risk

RWR vs. BLDG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
RWR
RWR Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
RWR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RWR Sortino Ratio Rank: 3434
Sortino Ratio Rank
RWR Omega Ratio Rank: 3333
Omega Ratio Rank
RWR Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
RWR Martin Ratio Rank: 4545
Martin Ratio Rank
BLDG
BLDG Risk / Return Rank: 2727
Overall Rank
BLDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BLDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 2727
Sortino Ratio Rank
BLDG Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
BLDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
BLDG Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

RWR vs. BLDG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Dow Jones REIT ETF (RWR) 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.

RWRBLDGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.27
1.00

+0.26

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
1.77
1.45

+0.32

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.17

+0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.12

1.10

+1.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.18

3.88

+3.30

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RWR vs. BLDG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWR Sharpe Ratio is 1.27, which is comparable to the BLDG Sharpe Ratio of 1.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWR 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.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

RWRBLDGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.27

1.00

+0.26

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.23

0.16

+0.08

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.25

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.31

0.46

-0.15

Drawdowns

RWR vs. BLDG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWR drawdown since its inception was -74.92%, which is greater than BLDG's maximum drawdown of -27.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWR and BLDG.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

RWRBLDGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-74.92%

-27.25%

-47.67%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.04%

-10.08%

+2.04%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.85%

-18.57%

-0.28%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-32.58%

-27.25%

-5.33%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-44.39%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.75%

-1.96%

+0.21%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-13.11%

-9.22%

-3.89%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.37%

2.86%

-0.49%

Volatility

RWR vs. BLDG - Volatility Comparison

SPDR Dow Jones REIT ETF (RWR) has a higher volatility of 4.29% compared to Cambria Global Real Estate ETF (BLDG) at 3.58%. This indicates that RWR'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.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

RWRBLDGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.29%

3.58%

+0.71%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.60%

8.26%

+1.34%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.45%

11.09%

+2.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.02%

15.27%

+3.75%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.51%

15.54%

+5.97%

RWR vs. BLDG - Expense Ratio Comparison

RWR has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than BLDG's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

RWR vs. BLDG - Dividend Comparison

RWR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.39%, less than BLDG's 5.68% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BLDG
Cambria Global Real Estate ETF		5.68%7.46%7.97%4.99%3.99%10.40%0.59%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RWR
SPDR Dow Jones REIT ETF		3.39%3.78%3.76%3.75%3.81%2.79%3.73%3.36%4.19%3.05%4.39%3.17%

Frequently Asked Questions

RWR and BLDG have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RWR has higher volatility (4.29%) compared to BLDG (3.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWR dropped -74.92% vs BLDG's -27.25%.

On 5-year performance, RWR leads with 4.44% vs 2.40% for BLDG. On fees, RWR is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, BLDG has been the lower-risk option at 3.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, RWR has performed better with a 4.44% return vs 2.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

RWR is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for BLDG.

BLDG has the higher dividend yield at 5.68%, compared with 3.39% for RWR.

They also come from different issuers: State Street and Cambria. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for RWR and 0.59% for BLDG.

RWR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.26 vs 1.00), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RWR and BLDG

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer