WBIL vs. KLMT

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

WBIL (WBI BullBear Quality 3000 ETF) and KLMT (Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF) are both Global Equities funds. WBIL is actively managed, while KLMT is passively managed. Over the past year, WBIL returned 23.27% vs 23.81% for KLMT. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. WBIL charges 1.23%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for KLMT.

Performance

WBIL vs. KLMT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in WBI BullBear Quality 3000 ETF (WBIL) and Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WBIL achieves a 12.59% return, which is significantly higher than KLMT's 10.49% return.

WBIL

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.88%
• YTD: 12.59%
• 6M: 10.68%
• 1Y: 23.27%
• 3Y*: 11.37%
• 5Y*: 5.75%
• 10Y*: 6.93%

KLMT

• 1D: 0.36%
• 1M: -0.76%
• YTD: 10.49%
• 6M: 9.51%
• 1Y: 23.81%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

WBIL vs. KLMT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
WBIL WBI BullBear Quality 3000 ETF	12.59%	-0.47%	3.69%
KLMT Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF	10.49%	21.31%	4.94%

Correlation

The correlation between WBIL and KLMT is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2024	0.81

The correlation between WBIL and KLMT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

WBIL vs. KLMT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	WBIL	KLMT
Technology	45.8%	33.8%
Industrials	12.2%	9.9%
Consumer Cyclical	8.7%	8.0%
Financial Services	8.7%	16.2%
Communication Services	7.3%	8.6%
Healthcare	5.8%	7.5%
Consumer Defensive	5.2%	4.7%
Real Estate	2.8%	2.6%
Basic Materials	2.7%	2.7%
Energy	2.5%	3.2%
Utilities	1.3%	1.8%

Return for Risk

WBIL vs. KLMT — Risk / Return Rank

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

WBIL

WBIL Risk / Return Rank: 52
WBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
WBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
WBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 47
WBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
WBIL Martin Ratio Rank: 62

KLMT

KLMT Risk / Return Rank: 61
KLMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
KLMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
KLMT Omega Ratio Rank: 61
KLMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
KLMT Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

WBIL vs. KLMT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WBI BullBear Quality 3000 ETF (WBIL) and Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	WBIL	KLMT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.52	1.80	-0.27
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.15	2.49	-0.34
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.33	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.37	2.51	-0.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.81	10.58	-0.77

WBIL vs. KLMT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WBIL Sharpe Ratio is 1.52, which is comparable to the KLMT Sharpe Ratio of 1.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WBIL and KLMT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

WBIL vs. KLMT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WBIL drawdown since its inception was -25.30%, which is greater than KLMT's maximum drawdown of -16.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WBIL and KLMT.

Drawdown Indicators

	WBIL	KLMT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.30%	-16.87%	-8.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.85%	-9.54%	-0.31%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.30%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.30%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-25.30%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.06%	-2.15%	-1.91%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.96%	-1.91%	-5.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.38%	2.26%	+0.12%

Volatility

WBIL vs. KLMT - Volatility Comparison

WBI BullBear Quality 3000 ETF (WBIL) has a higher volatility of 6.91% compared to Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF (KLMT) at 5.29%. This indicates that WBIL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KLMT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	WBIL	KLMT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.91%	5.29%	+1.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.03%	11.05%	+0.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.36%	13.32%	+2.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.89%	16.00%	-2.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.78%	16.00%	-3.22%

WBIL vs. KLMT - Expense Ratio Comparison

WBIL has a 1.23% expense ratio, which is higher than KLMT's 0.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

WBIL vs. KLMT - Dividend Comparison

WBIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.04%, less than KLMT's 1.78% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
KLMT Invesco MSCI Global Climate 500 ETF	1.78%	1.95%	0.85%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
WBIL WBI BullBear Quality 3000 ETF	0.04%	0.05%	0.07%	0.29%	1.03%	2.02%	0.19%	0.73%	0.75%	0.83%	0.58%	0.20%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both WBIL and KLMT in my portfolio?

WBIL and KLMT have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, WBIL or KLMT?

WBIL has higher volatility (6.91%) compared to KLMT (5.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WBIL dropped -25.30% vs KLMT's -16.87%.

Which ETF is better, WBIL or KLMT?

On 1-year performance, KLMT leads with 23.81% vs 23.27% for WBIL. On fees, KLMT is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, KLMT has been the lower-risk option at 5.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, WBIL or KLMT?

Over the 1-year period, KLMT has performed better with a 23.81% return vs 23.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, WBIL or KLMT?

KLMT is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 1.23% for WBIL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, WBIL or KLMT?

KLMT has the higher dividend yield at 1.78%, compared with 0.04% for WBIL.

What is the main difference between WBIL and KLMT?

They also come from different issuers: WBI and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 1.23% for WBIL and 0.10% for KLMT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KLMT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.80 vs 1.52), 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.