SDG vs. FWD
SDG (iShares MSCI Global Sustainable Development Goals ETF) and FWD (AB Disruptors ETF) are both Global Equities funds. SDG is passively managed, while FWD is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, SDG returned 7.92%/yr vs 38.93%/yr for FWD. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SDG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for FWD.
Performance
SDG vs. FWD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SDG achieves a 10.59% return, which is significantly lower than FWD's 38.47% return.
SDG
- 1D
- 0.64%
- 1M
- 4.06%
- YTD
- 10.59%
- 6M
- 10.55%
- 1Y
- 25.38%
- 3Y*
- 7.92%
- 5Y*
- 0.79%
- 10Y*
- 8.52%
FWD
- 1D
- -1.17%
- 1M
- 10.81%
- YTD
- 38.47%
- 6M
- 37.27%
- 1Y
- 72.96%
- 3Y*
- 38.93%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SDG vs. FWD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
SDG iShares MSCI Global Sustainable Development Goals ETF | 10.59% | 20.19% | -10.09% | 8.18% |
FWD AB Disruptors ETF | 38.47% | 32.00% | 29.23% | 25.66% |
Correlation
The correlation between SDG and FWD is 0.67, 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 | 0.67 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.59 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2023 | 0.59 |
The correlation between SDG and FWD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
SDG vs. FWD — Risk / Return Rank
SDG
FWD
SDG vs. FWD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Global Sustainable Development Goals ETF (SDG) and AB Disruptors ETF (FWD). 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.
| SDG | FWD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.26 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.19 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.32 | 1.49 | -0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.94 | 5.63 | -2.69 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.77 | 20.01 | -9.24 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| SDG | FWD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.77 | 3.03 | -1.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.05 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.51 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.52 | 1.65 | -1.13 |
Drawdowns
SDG vs. FWD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SDG drawdown since its inception was -30.35%, roughly equal to the maximum FWD drawdown of -29.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SDG and FWD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SDG | FWD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -30.35% | -29.02% | -1.33% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.68% | -13.03% | +4.35% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.92% | -29.02% | +6.10% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -30.35% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -30.35% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -1.44% | +1.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.66% | -4.06% | -5.60% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.36% | 3.66% | -1.30% |
Volatility
SDG vs. FWD - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI Global Sustainable Development Goals ETF (SDG) is 5.27%, while AB Disruptors ETF (FWD) has a volatility of 7.87%. This indicates that SDG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FWD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SDG | FWD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.27% | 7.87% | -2.60% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.08% | 19.00% | -7.92% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.42% | 24.18% | -9.76% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.63% | 24.72% | -9.09% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.68% | 24.72% | -8.04% |
SDG vs. FWD - Expense Ratio Comparison
SDG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than FWD's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
SDG vs. FWD - Dividend Comparison
SDG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.81%, more than FWD's 0.08% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FWD AB Disruptors ETF | 0.08% | 0.11% | 1.89% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SDG iShares MSCI Global Sustainable Development Goals ETF | 1.81% | 2.00% | 1.95% | 1.77% | 1.82% | 1.66% | 0.97% | 1.39% | 2.47% | 2.54% | 1.34% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SDG and FWD have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FWD has higher volatility (7.87%) compared to SDG (5.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SDG dropped -30.35% vs FWD's -29.02%.
On 3-year performance, FWD leads with 38.93% vs 7.92% for SDG. On fees, SDG is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, SDG has been the lower-risk option at 5.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, FWD has performed better with a 38.93% return vs 7.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SDG is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for FWD.
SDG has the higher dividend yield at 1.81%, compared with 0.08% for FWD.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and AllianceBernstein. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for SDG and 0.65% for FWD.
FWD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.03 vs 1.77), 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.
Find the right allocation for SDG and FWD
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