PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
WBIF vs. COMT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

WBIF vs. COMT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF) and iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF (COMT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WBIF achieves a 11.61% return, which is significantly lower than COMT's 39.67% return. Over the past 10 years, WBIF has underperformed COMT with an annualized return of 5.52%, while COMT has yielded a comparatively higher 9.09% annualized return.


WBIF

1D
-0.97%
1M
5.70%
YTD
11.61%
6M
10.57%
1Y
23.01%
3Y*
8.85%
5Y*
2.38%
10Y*
5.52%

COMT

1D
0.78%
1M
-4.35%
YTD
39.67%
6M
39.06%
1Y
47.51%
3Y*
16.86%
5Y*
13.50%
10Y*
9.09%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

WBIF vs. COMT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
WBIF
WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF
11.61%9.16%3.43%0.49%-8.38%16.56%-2.71%2.68%-4.68%19.42%
COMT
iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF
39.67%6.07%5.96%-6.56%19.45%36.88%-18.66%10.81%-6.67%11.70%

Correlation

The correlation between WBIF and COMT is -0.12, 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

-0.12

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

0.05

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

0.21

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.27

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 17, 2014

0.28

The correlation between WBIF and COMT shifts across timeframes, from -0.12 (1 year) to 0.28 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

WBIF vs. COMT - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
WBIF
COMT

Financial Services

31.0%
100.0%

Technology

19.9%

-

Industrials

14.6%

-

Consumer Cyclical

11.1%

-

Utilities

10.3%

-

Healthcare

3.4%

-

Consumer Defensive

3.1%

-

Energy

2.9%

-

Communication Services

2.6%

-

Basic Materials

1.0%

-

Real Estate

-

-

Financial Services

WBIF
31.0%
COMT
100.0%

Technology

WBIF
19.9%
COMT

-

Industrials

WBIF
14.6%
COMT

-

Consumer Cyclical

WBIF
11.1%
COMT

-

Utilities

WBIF
10.3%
COMT

-

Healthcare

WBIF
3.4%
COMT

-

Consumer Defensive

WBIF
3.1%
COMT

-

Energy

WBIF
2.9%
COMT

-

Communication Services

WBIF
2.6%
COMT

-

Basic Materials

WBIF
1.0%
COMT

-

Real Estate

WBIF

-

COMT

-

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

WBIF vs. COMT — Risk / Return Rank

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

WBIF
WBIF Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
WBIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
WBIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
WBIF Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
WBIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
WBIF Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
Martin Ratio Rank

COMT
COMT Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
COMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
COMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
COMT Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
COMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
COMT Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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.

WBIF vs. COMT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF) and iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF (COMT). 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.


WBIFCOMTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.36

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.16

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.40

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.50

5.95

-2.45

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.53

14.11

-1.57

WBIF vs. COMT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WBIF Sharpe Ratio is 1.88, which is comparable to the COMT Sharpe Ratio of 2.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WBIF and COMT, 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


WBIFCOMTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.88

2.24

-0.36

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.19

0.64

-0.46

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.45

0.48

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.30

0.20

+0.10

Drawdowns

WBIF vs. COMT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WBIF drawdown since its inception was -20.29%, smaller than the maximum COMT drawdown of -51.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WBIF and COMT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


WBIFCOMTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-20.29%

-51.89%

+31.60%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.60%

-8.02%

+1.42%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.16%

-13.31%

-3.85%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.29%

-29.00%

+8.71%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-20.29%

-39.22%

+18.93%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.97%

-4.82%

+3.85%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.74%

-24.07%

+16.33%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.84%

3.38%

-1.54%

Volatility

WBIF vs. COMT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF) is 4.13%, while iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF (COMT) has a volatility of 7.37%. This indicates that WBIF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than COMT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


WBIFCOMTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.13%

7.37%

-3.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.63%

18.80%

-10.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.31%

21.29%

-8.98%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.86%

21.06%

-8.20%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.34%

18.89%

-6.55%

WBIF vs. COMT - Expense Ratio Comparison

WBIF has a 1.25% expense ratio, which is higher than COMT's 0.48% expense ratio.


Dividends

WBIF vs. COMT - Dividend Comparison

WBIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.06%, less than COMT's 5.54% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
COMT
iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF
5.54%7.74%4.90%5.19%29.79%17.79%0.36%2.61%11.65%5.16%0.52%1.44%
WBIF
WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF
0.06%0.14%1.17%0.82%0.96%2.59%0.09%1.04%0.77%0.75%0.67%0.86%

Frequently Asked Questions


WBIF and COMT have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

COMT has higher volatility (7.37%) compared to WBIF (4.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WBIF dropped -20.29% vs COMT's -51.89%.

On 10-year performance, COMT leads with 9.09% vs 5.52% for WBIF. On fees, COMT is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, WBIF has been the lower-risk option at 4.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, COMT has performed better with a 9.09% return vs 5.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

COMT is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for WBIF.

COMT has the higher dividend yield at 5.54%, compared with 0.06% for WBIF.

WBIF is categorized as Global Equities, while COMT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: WBI and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.25% for WBIF and 0.48% for COMT.

COMT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.24 vs 1.88), 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 WBIF and COMT

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