WLDR vs. FWD

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

WLDR (Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF) and FWD (AB Disruptors ETF) are both Global Equities funds. WLDR is passively managed, while FWD is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, WLDR returned 30.33%/yr vs 31.81%/yr for FWD. Their 0.73 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. WLDR charges 0.67%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for FWD.

Performance

WLDR vs. FWD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF (WLDR) and AB Disruptors ETF (FWD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WLDR achieves a 29.98% return, which is significantly higher than FWD's 22.59% return.

WLDR

• 1D: 1.15%
• 1M: 3.17%
• 6M: 21.17%
• YTD: 29.98%
• 1Y: 49.01%
• 3Y*: 30.33%
• 5Y*: 18.04%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.57%

FWD

• 1D: 2.11%
• 1M: -6.94%
• 6M: 13.21%
• YTD: 22.59%
• 1Y: 42.14%
• 3Y*: 31.81%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 32.54%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	$42.21M	$42.99M	$37.02M
WLDR Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF	$1.08M	$815.02K	$665.85K

WLDR vs. FWD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
WLDR Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF	29.98%	31.24%	22.74%	16.07%
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	22.59%	32.00%	29.23%	23.48%

Correlation

The correlation between WLDR and FWD is 0.76, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.76
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 22, 2023	0.73

The correlation between WLDR and FWD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

WLDR vs. FWD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	WLDR	FWD
Technology	37.8%	51.2%
Financial Services	13.0%	0.5%
Communication Services	9.1%	3.8%
Healthcare	8.2%	8.1%
Industrials	7.8%	16.7%
Consumer Cyclical	7.2%	3.4%
Consumer Defensive	6.7%	0.8%
Energy	3.7%	0.8%
Basic Materials	2.6%	1.8%
Utilities	2.5%	0.3%
Real Estate	1.6%	0.8%

Return for Risk

WLDR vs. FWD — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

WLDR

WLDR Risk / Return Rank: 94
WLDR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
WLDR Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
WLDR Omega Ratio Rank: 92
WLDR Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
WLDR Martin Ratio Rank: 94

FWD

FWD Risk / Return Rank: 57
FWD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
FWD Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
FWD Omega Ratio Rank: 54
FWD Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
FWD Martin Ratio Rank: 63

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

WLDR vs. FWD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF (WLDR) 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.

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.

	WLDR	FWD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.80	1.44	+1.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.77	1.93	+1.83
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.25	+0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.56	2.07	+3.49
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.28	7.83	+11.45

WLDR vs. FWD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WLDR Sharpe Ratio is 2.80, which is higher than the FWD Sharpe Ratio of 1.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WLDR and FWD, 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

WLDR vs. FWD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WLDR drawdown since its inception was -44.69%, which is greater than FWD's maximum drawdown of -29.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WLDR and FWD.

Drawdown Indicators

	WLDR	FWD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.69%	-29.02%	-15.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.86%	-20.49%	+11.63%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.30%	-29.02%	+8.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.77%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.20%	-14.00%	+11.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.52%	-4.27%	-4.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.55%	5.39%	-2.84%

Volatility

WLDR vs. FWD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF (WLDR) is 6.61%, while AB Disruptors ETF (FWD) has a volatility of 11.16%. This indicates that WLDR 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

	WLDR	FWD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.61%	11.16%	-4.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.90%	24.83%	-9.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.59%	29.51%	-11.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.57%	26.01%	-8.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.04%	26.01%	-4.97%

WLDR vs. FWD - Expense Ratio Comparison

WLDR has a 0.67% expense ratio, which is higher than FWD's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

WLDR vs. FWD - Dividend Comparison

WLDR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.16%, more than FWD's 0.09% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FWD AB Disruptors ETF	0.09%	0.11%	1.89%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
WLDR Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF	7.16%	9.01%	13.99%	2.28%	2.10%	7.55%	1.80%	2.48%	2.82%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both WLDR and FWD in my portfolio?

WLDR and FWD have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, WLDR or FWD?

FWD has higher volatility (11.16%) compared to WLDR (6.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WLDR dropped -44.69% vs FWD's -29.02%.

Which ETF is better, WLDR or FWD?

On 3-year performance, FWD leads with 31.81% vs 30.33% for WLDR. On fees, FWD is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, WLDR has been the lower-risk option at 6.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, WLDR or FWD?

Over the 3-year period, FWD has performed better with a 31.81% return vs 30.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, WLDR or FWD?

FWD is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.67% for WLDR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, WLDR or FWD?

WLDR has the higher dividend yield at 7.16%, compared with 0.09% for FWD.

What is the main difference between WLDR and FWD?

They also come from different issuers: Regents Park and AllianceBernstein. Their fees differ too: 0.67% for WLDR and 0.65% for FWD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

WLDR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs 1.44), 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.