WABF vs. CFIT

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

WABF (Western Asset Bond ETF) and CFIT (Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF) are both Intermediate Core-Plus Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, WABF returned 6.00% vs 13.11% for CFIT. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. WABF charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.71%/yr for CFIT.

Performance

WABF vs. CFIT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Western Asset Bond ETF (WABF) and Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF (CFIT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WABF achieves a 0.32% return, which is significantly lower than CFIT's 6.14% return.

WABF

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: 0.08%
• YTD: 0.32%
• 6M: 0.47%
• 1Y: 6.00%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CFIT

• 1D: 0.28%
• 1M: 2.43%
• YTD: 6.14%
• 6M: 6.20%
• 1Y: 13.11%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

WABF vs. CFIT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
WABF Western Asset Bond ETF	0.32%	4.96%
CFIT Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF	6.14%	3.59%

Correlation

The correlation between WABF and CFIT is 0.61, 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	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2025	0.62

The correlation between WABF and CFIT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

WABF vs. CFIT — Risk / Return Rank

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

WABF

WABF Risk / Return Rank: 42
WABF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
WABF Sortino Ratio Rank: 47
WABF Omega Ratio Rank: 45
WABF Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
WABF Martin Ratio Rank: 37

CFIT

CFIT Risk / Return Rank: 69
CFIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
CFIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
CFIT Omega Ratio Rank: 76
CFIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
CFIT Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

WABF vs. CFIT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Western Asset Bond ETF (WABF) and Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF (CFIT). 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.

	WABF	CFIT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.57	2.40	-0.83
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.36	3.38	-1.01
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.46	-0.18
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.90	3.07	-1.17
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	5.88	11.57	-5.68
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

WABF vs. CFIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WABF Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is lower than the CFIT Sharpe Ratio of 2.40. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WABF and CFIT, 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

	WABF	CFIT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.57	2.40	-0.83
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.01	1.55	-0.54

Drawdowns

WABF vs. CFIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WABF drawdown since its inception was -5.36%, which is greater than CFIT's maximum drawdown of -4.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WABF and CFIT.

Drawdown Indicators

	WABF	CFIT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.36%	-4.23%	-1.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.03%	-4.23%	+1.20%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.50%	0.00%	-1.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.51%	-1.21%	-0.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.98%	1.12%	-0.14%

Volatility

WABF vs. CFIT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Western Asset Bond ETF (WABF) is 1.12%, while Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF (CFIT) has a volatility of 1.63%. This indicates that WABF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CFIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	WABF	CFIT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.12%	1.63%	-0.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.49%	4.37%	-1.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.85%	5.49%	-1.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.02%	5.45%	+0.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.02%	5.45%	+0.57%

WABF vs. CFIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

WABF has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than CFIT's 0.71% expense ratio.

Dividends

WABF vs. CFIT - Dividend Comparison

WABF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.13%, more than CFIT's 4.07% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CFIT Cambria Fixed Income Trend ETF	4.07%	3.14%	0.00%	0.00%
WABF Western Asset Bond ETF	5.13%	5.67%	6.25%	1.46%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both WABF and CFIT in my portfolio?

WABF and CFIT have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, WABF or CFIT?

CFIT has higher volatility (1.63%) compared to WABF (1.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WABF dropped -5.36% vs CFIT's -4.23%.

Which ETF is better, WABF or CFIT?

On 1-year performance, CFIT leads with 13.11% vs 6.00% for WABF. On fees, WABF is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, WABF has been the lower-risk option at 1.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, WABF or CFIT?

Over the 1-year period, CFIT has performed better with a 13.11% return vs 6.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, WABF or CFIT?

WABF is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.71% for CFIT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, WABF or CFIT?

WABF has the higher dividend yield at 5.13%, compared with 4.07% for CFIT.

What is the main difference between WABF and CFIT?

They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Cambria. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for WABF and 0.71% for CFIT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CFIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs 1.57), 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.