WBIF vs. FWD

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF) and AB Disruptors ETF (FWD).

WBIF and FWD are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. WBIF is an actively managed fund by WBI. It was launched on Aug 27, 2014. FWD is an actively managed fund by AllianceBernstein. It was launched on Mar 21, 2023.

Performance

WBIF vs. FWD - Performance Comparison

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

WBIF vs. FWD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
WBIF WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF	0.92%	9.16%	3.43%	6.74%
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	3.97%	32.00%	29.23%	25.66%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WBIF achieves a 0.92% return, which is significantly lower than FWD's 3.97% return.

WBIF

• 1D: 1.44%
• 1M: -4.68%
• YTD: 0.92%
• 6M: 0.49%
• 1Y: 8.72%
• 3Y*: 6.02%
• 5Y*: 1.57%
• 10Y*: 4.48%

FWD

• 1D: 5.03%
• 1M: -7.40%
• YTD: 3.97%
• 6M: 7.40%
• 1Y: 54.36%
• 3Y*: 28.49%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

WBIF vs. FWD - Expense Ratio Comparison

WBIF has a 1.25% expense ratio, which is higher than FWD's 0.65% expense ratio.

WBIF

WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF

FWD

AB Disruptors ETF

Return for Risk

WBIF vs. FWD — Risk / Return Rank

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

WBIF

WBIF Risk / Return Rank: 31
WBIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
WBIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
WBIF Omega Ratio Rank: 30
WBIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
WBIF Martin Ratio Rank: 31

FWD

FWD Risk / Return Rank: 91
FWD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
FWD Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
FWD Omega Ratio Rank: 88
FWD Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
FWD Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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. FWD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF) 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.

	WBIF	FWD	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.61	1.89	-1.28
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.88	2.51	-1.63
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.36	-0.23
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.76	3.94	-3.18
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	2.77	13.30	-10.53
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

WBIF vs. FWD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WBIF Sharpe Ratio is 0.61, which is lower than the FWD Sharpe Ratio of 1.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WBIF and FWD, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	WBIF	FWD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.61	1.89	-1.28
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.12	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.37	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.23	1.24	-1.01

Correlation

The correlation between WBIF and FWD is 0.66, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

WBIF vs. FWD - Dividend Comparison

WBIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.06%, less than FWD's 0.11% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	0.11%	0.11%	1.89%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

WBIF vs. FWD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WBIF drawdown since its inception was -20.29%, smaller than the maximum FWD drawdown of -29.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WBIF and FWD.

Drawdown Indicators

	WBIF	FWD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.29%	-29.02%	+8.73%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.51%	-13.50%	+0.99%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-20.29%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-20.29%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.26%	-8.65%	+3.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.83%	-4.23%	-3.60%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.44%	4.00%	-0.56%

Volatility

WBIF vs. FWD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF) is 3.29%, while AB Disruptors ETF (FWD) has a volatility of 11.26%. This indicates that WBIF 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.

Volatility by Period

	WBIF	FWD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.29%	11.26%	-7.97%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.02%	19.48%	-10.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.35%	28.86%	-14.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.82%	24.63%	-11.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.24%	24.63%	-12.39%