WBIL vs. NZAC

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

WBIL (WBI BullBear Quality 3000 ETF) and NZAC (SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF) are both Global Equities funds. WBIL is actively managed, while NZAC is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, WBIL returned 7.19%/yr vs 12.25%/yr for NZAC. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. WBIL charges 1.23%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for NZAC.

Performance

WBIL vs. NZAC - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WBIL achieves a 17.35% return, which is significantly higher than NZAC's 9.73% return. Over the past 10 years, WBIL has underperformed NZAC with an annualized return of 7.19%, while NZAC has yielded a comparatively higher 12.25% annualized return.

WBIL

• 1D: 1.07%
• 1M: 11.93%
• YTD: 17.35%
• 6M: 16.10%
• 1Y: 30.59%
• 3Y*: 13.28%
• 5Y*: 6.30%
• 10Y*: 7.19%

NZAC

• 1D: 0.56%
• 1M: 4.72%
• YTD: 9.73%
• 6M: 10.87%
• 1Y: 26.10%
• 3Y*: 19.38%
• 5Y*: 10.26%
• 10Y*: 12.25%

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

WBIL vs. NZAC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
WBIL WBI BullBear Quality 3000 ETF	17.35%	-0.47%	13.29%	11.79%	-9.60%	18.67%	-2.19%	11.65%	-9.67%	19.31%
NZAC SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF	9.73%	20.55%	16.67%	23.22%	-19.77%	18.35%	17.21%	28.24%	-9.80%	22.93%

Correlation

The correlation between WBIL and NZAC is 0.80, 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	0.80
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.78
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.74
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 28, 2014	0.68

The correlation between WBIL and NZAC shifts across timeframes, from 0.68 (all time) to 0.80 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

WBIL vs. NZAC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	WBIL	NZAC
Technology	35.5%	34.3%
Industrials	17.1%	7.3%
Consumer Cyclical	11.6%	8.2%
Healthcare	11.6%	7.8%
Financial Services	9.8%	13.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.8%	1.0%
Communication Services	4.3%	8.5%
Energy	2.9%	1.2%
Real Estate	2.8%	5.2%
Basic Materials	2.5%	1.9%
Utilities	0.8%	1.4%

Return for Risk

WBIL vs. NZAC — Risk / Return Rank

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

WBIL

WBIL Risk / Return Rank: 65
WBIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
WBIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
WBIL Omega Ratio Rank: 60
WBIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
WBIL Martin Ratio Rank: 73

NZAC

NZAC Risk / Return Rank: 58
NZAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
NZAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
NZAC Omega Ratio Rank: 58
NZAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
NZAC Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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. NZAC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for WBI BullBear Quality 3000 ETF (WBIL) and SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC). 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.

	WBIL	NZAC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.16	2.03	+0.13
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.02	2.85	+0.17
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.36	+0.02
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.19	2.61	+0.58
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	14.05	11.35	+2.70
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

WBIL vs. NZAC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WBIL Sharpe Ratio is 2.16, which is comparable to the NZAC Sharpe Ratio of 2.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WBIL and NZAC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	WBIL	NZAC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.16	2.03	+0.13
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.46	0.61	-0.15
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.57	0.72	-0.15
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.40	0.62	-0.22

Drawdowns

WBIL vs. NZAC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WBIL drawdown since its inception was -25.30%, smaller than the maximum NZAC drawdown of -33.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WBIL and NZAC.

Drawdown Indicators

	WBIL	NZAC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.30%	-33.72%	+8.42%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.85%	-10.10%	+0.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.30%	-16.19%	-9.11%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.30%	-28.31%	+3.01%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-25.30%	-33.72%	+8.42%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.98%	-5.32%	-1.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.24%	2.32%	-0.08%

Volatility

WBIL vs. NZAC - Volatility Comparison

WBI BullBear Quality 3000 ETF (WBIL) has a higher volatility of 4.72% compared to SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC) at 3.66%. This indicates that WBIL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NZAC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	WBIL	NZAC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.72%	3.66%	+1.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.75%	10.33%	+0.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.26%	12.91%	+1.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.70%	16.81%	-3.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.65%	17.14%	-4.49%

WBIL vs. NZAC - Expense Ratio Comparison

WBIL has a 1.23% expense ratio, which is higher than NZAC's 0.12% expense ratio.

Dividends

WBIL vs. NZAC - Dividend Comparison

WBIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.04%, less than NZAC's 2.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
NZAC SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF	2.02%	1.90%	1.88%	1.65%	1.81%	1.62%	1.59%	2.17%	2.53%	2.20%	2.00%	2.40%
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 NZAC in my portfolio?

WBIL and NZAC have a correlation of 0.80, 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 NZAC?

WBIL has higher volatility (4.72%) compared to NZAC (3.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WBIL dropped -25.30% vs NZAC's -33.72%.

Which ETF is better, WBIL or NZAC?

On 10-year performance, NZAC leads with 12.25% vs 7.19% for WBIL. On fees, NZAC is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, NZAC has been the lower-risk option at 3.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, WBIL or NZAC?

Over the 10-year period, NZAC has performed better with a 12.25% return vs 7.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, WBIL or NZAC?

NZAC is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 1.23% for WBIL.

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

NZAC has the higher dividend yield at 2.02%, compared with 0.04% for WBIL.

What is the main difference between WBIL and NZAC?

They also come from different issuers: WBI and State Street. Their fees differ too: 1.23% for WBIL and 0.12% for NZAC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

WBIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 2.03), 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.