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

Performance

WBIF vs. SPGM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF) and SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF (SPGM). 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 12.01% return, which is significantly lower than SPGM's 13.52% return. Over the past 10 years, WBIF has underperformed SPGM with an annualized return of 5.56%, while SPGM has yielded a comparatively higher 12.97% annualized return.


WBIF

1D
0.36%
1M
5.33%
YTD
12.01%
6M
11.33%
1Y
23.76%
3Y*
9.09%
5Y*
2.46%
10Y*
5.56%

SPGM

1D
0.57%
1M
4.58%
YTD
13.52%
6M
13.92%
1Y
32.19%
3Y*
21.80%
5Y*
11.60%
10Y*
12.97%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

WBIF vs. SPGM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
WBIF
WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF
12.01%9.16%3.43%0.49%-8.38%16.56%-2.71%2.68%-4.68%19.42%
SPGM
SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF
13.52%23.62%16.75%21.34%-17.53%21.13%15.28%26.58%-10.12%23.26%

Correlation

The correlation between WBIF and SPGM is 0.73, 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

0.73

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

0.77

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

0.75

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

0.71

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 28, 2014

0.69

The correlation between WBIF and SPGM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

WBIF vs. SPGM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
WBIF
SPGM

Financial Services

31.0%
16.4%

Technology

19.9%
27.4%

Industrials

14.6%
13.1%

Consumer Cyclical

11.1%
9.2%

Utilities

10.3%
2.2%

Healthcare

3.4%
8.2%

Consumer Defensive

3.1%
4.8%

Energy

2.9%
4.5%

Communication Services

2.6%
8.5%

Basic Materials

1.0%
3.9%

Real Estate

-

1.9%

Financial Services

WBIF
31.0%
SPGM
16.4%

Technology

WBIF
19.9%
SPGM
27.4%

Industrials

WBIF
14.6%
SPGM
13.1%

Consumer Cyclical

WBIF
11.1%
SPGM
9.2%

Utilities

WBIF
10.3%
SPGM
2.2%

Healthcare

WBIF
3.4%
SPGM
8.2%

Consumer Defensive

WBIF
3.1%
SPGM
4.8%

Energy

WBIF
2.9%
SPGM
4.5%

Communication Services

WBIF
2.6%
SPGM
8.5%

Basic Materials

WBIF
1.0%
SPGM
3.9%

Real Estate

WBIF

-

SPGM
1.9%

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. SPGM — Risk / Return Rank

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

WBIF
WBIF Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
WBIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
WBIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
WBIF Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
WBIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
WBIF Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
Martin Ratio Rank

SPGM
SPGM Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
SPGM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SPGM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
SPGM Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
SPGM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
SPGM Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
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. SPGM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF) and SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF (SPGM). 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.


WBIFSPGMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.57

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.63

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.45

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.62

3.40

+0.21

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.94

15.38

-2.43

WBIF vs. SPGM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WBIF Sharpe Ratio is 1.94, which is comparable to the SPGM Sharpe Ratio of 2.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WBIF and SPGM, 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


WBIFSPGMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.94

2.51

-0.57

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.19

0.73

-0.54

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.45

0.74

-0.29

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.31

0.66

-0.35

Drawdowns

WBIF vs. SPGM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WBIF drawdown since its inception was -20.29%, smaller than the maximum SPGM drawdown of -33.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WBIF and SPGM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


WBIFSPGMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-20.29%

-33.97%

+13.68%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.60%

-9.50%

+2.90%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.16%

-16.90%

-0.26%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.29%

-25.93%

+5.64%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-20.29%

-33.97%

+13.68%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.61%

-0.30%

-0.31%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.73%

-4.81%

-2.92%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.84%

2.10%

-0.26%

Volatility

WBIF vs. SPGM - Volatility Comparison

WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF) has a higher volatility of 4.11% compared to SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF (SPGM) at 3.87%. This indicates that WBIF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SPGM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


WBIFSPGMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.11%

3.87%

+0.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.63%

10.36%

-1.73%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.29%

12.88%

-0.59%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.86%

16.03%

-3.17%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.34%

17.57%

-5.23%

WBIF vs. SPGM - Expense Ratio Comparison

WBIF has a 1.25% expense ratio, which is higher than SPGM's 0.09% expense ratio.


Dividends

WBIF vs. SPGM - Dividend Comparison

WBIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.06%, less than SPGM's 1.78% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
SPGM
SPDR Portfolio MSCI Global Stock Market ETF
1.78%1.89%1.98%2.09%2.37%1.94%1.45%2.46%1.89%2.29%1.87%3.70%
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 SPGM have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

WBIF has higher volatility (4.11%) compared to SPGM (3.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WBIF dropped -20.29% vs SPGM's -33.97%.

On 10-year performance, SPGM leads with 12.97% vs 5.56% for WBIF. On fees, SPGM is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, SPGM has been the lower-risk option at 3.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, SPGM has performed better with a 12.97% return vs 5.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SPGM is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for WBIF.

SPGM has the higher dividend yield at 1.78%, compared with 0.06% for WBIF.

They also come from different issuers: WBI and State Street. Their fees differ too: 1.25% for WBIF and 0.09% for SPGM.

SPGM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.51 vs 1.94), 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 SPGM

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