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

Performance

WBIF vs. USMV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF) and iShares MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Factor ETF (USMV). 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 12.70% return, which is significantly higher than USMV's 3.37% return. Over the past 10 years, WBIF has underperformed USMV with an annualized return of 5.62%, while USMV has yielded a comparatively higher 10.00% annualized return.


WBIF

1D
0.15%
1M
6.09%
YTD
12.70%
6M
12.42%
1Y
25.40%
3Y*
9.21%
5Y*
2.62%
10Y*
5.62%

USMV

1D
-0.02%
1M
2.48%
YTD
3.37%
6M
3.65%
1Y
5.11%
3Y*
12.04%
5Y*
7.76%
10Y*
10.00%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

WBIF vs. USMV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
WBIF
WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF
12.70%9.16%3.43%0.49%-8.38%16.56%-2.71%2.68%-4.68%19.42%
USMV
iShares MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Factor ETF
3.37%7.65%15.74%10.33%-9.43%20.85%5.64%27.69%1.33%18.91%

Correlation

The correlation between WBIF and USMV is 0.64, 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

0.64

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

0.72

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

0.68

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

0.67

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

0.68

The correlation between WBIF and USMV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.

WBIF vs. USMV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
WBIF
USMV

Financial Services

31.0%
12.4%

Technology

19.9%
30.8%

Industrials

14.6%
5.7%

Consumer Cyclical

11.1%
5.7%

Utilities

10.3%
7.5%

Healthcare

3.4%
12.5%

Consumer Defensive

3.1%
10.0%

Energy

2.9%
3.6%

Communication Services

2.6%
5.9%

Basic Materials

1.0%
2.2%

Real Estate

-

2.2%

Financial Services

WBIF
31.0%
USMV
12.4%

Technology

WBIF
19.9%
USMV
30.8%

Industrials

WBIF
14.6%
USMV
5.7%

Consumer Cyclical

WBIF
11.1%
USMV
5.7%

Utilities

WBIF
10.3%
USMV
7.5%

Healthcare

WBIF
3.4%
USMV
12.5%

Consumer Defensive

WBIF
3.1%
USMV
10.0%

Energy

WBIF
2.9%
USMV
3.6%

Communication Services

WBIF
2.6%
USMV
5.9%

Basic Materials

WBIF
1.0%
USMV
2.2%

Real Estate

WBIF

-

USMV
2.2%

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. USMV — Risk / Return Rank

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

WBIF
WBIF Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
WBIF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
WBIF Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
WBIF Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
WBIF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
WBIF Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

USMV
USMV Risk / Return Rank: 1919
Overall Rank
USMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
USMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 1818
Sortino Ratio Rank
USMV Omega Ratio Rank: 1717
Omega Ratio Rank
USMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 1919
Calmar Ratio Rank
USMV Martin Ratio Rank: 2222
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. USMV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF) and iShares MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Factor ETF (USMV). 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.


WBIFUSMVDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.08

0.61

+1.47

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.99

0.91

+2.08

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.11

+0.27

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.82

0.82

+3.00

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

13.69

2.74

+10.96

WBIF vs. USMV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WBIF Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is higher than the USMV Sharpe Ratio of 0.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WBIF and USMV, 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


WBIFUSMVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.08

0.61

+1.47

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.20

0.63

-0.43

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.46

0.69

-0.24

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.31

0.87

-0.56

Drawdowns

WBIF vs. USMV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WBIF drawdown since its inception was -20.29%, smaller than the maximum USMV drawdown of -33.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WBIF and USMV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


WBIFUSMVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-20.29%

-33.10%

+12.81%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.60%

-6.46%

-0.14%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.16%

-9.36%

-7.80%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-20.29%

-17.93%

-2.36%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-20.29%

-33.10%

+12.81%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.49%

+0.49%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.74%

-2.88%

-4.86%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.84%

1.93%

-0.09%

Volatility

WBIF vs. USMV - Volatility Comparison

WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF) has a higher volatility of 4.03% compared to iShares MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Factor ETF (USMV) at 2.27%. This indicates that WBIF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than USMV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


WBIFUSMVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.03%

2.27%

+1.76%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.59%

5.93%

+2.66%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.27%

8.47%

+3.80%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.85%

12.35%

+0.50%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.34%

14.51%

-2.17%

WBIF vs. USMV - Expense Ratio Comparison

WBIF has a 1.25% expense ratio, which is higher than USMV's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

WBIF vs. USMV - Dividend Comparison

WBIF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.06%, less than USMV's 1.52% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
USMV
iShares MSCI USA Minimum Volatility Factor ETF
1.52%1.49%1.67%1.82%1.62%1.26%1.81%1.88%2.12%1.77%2.22%2.02%
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 USMV have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

WBIF has higher volatility (4.03%) compared to USMV (2.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WBIF dropped -20.29% vs USMV's -33.10%.

On 10-year performance, USMV leads with 10.00% vs 5.62% for WBIF. On fees, USMV is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, USMV has been the lower-risk option at 2.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, USMV has performed better with a 10.00% return vs 5.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

USMV is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for WBIF.

USMV has the higher dividend yield at 1.52%, compared with 0.06% for WBIF.

WBIF is categorized as Global Equities, while USMV is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: WBI and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.25% for WBIF and 0.15% for USMV.

WBIF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.08 vs 0.61), 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 USMV

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