WLDR vs. SFGV

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

WLDR (Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF) and SFGV (Sequoia Global Value ETF) are both Global Equities funds. WLDR is passively managed, while SFGV is actively managed. Over the past year, WLDR returned 57.12% vs 25.44% for SFGV. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. WLDR charges 0.67%/yr vs 0.33%/yr for SFGV.

Performance

WLDR vs. SFGV - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WLDR achieves a 29.55% return, which is significantly higher than SFGV's 11.37% return.

WLDR

• 1D: -1.18%
• 1M: 11.85%
• YTD: 29.55%
• 6M: 34.62%
• 1Y: 57.12%
• 3Y*: 32.72%
• 5Y*: 18.09%
• 10Y*: —

SFGV

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: 3.27%
• YTD: 11.37%
• 6M: 11.60%
• 1Y: 25.44%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

WLDR vs. SFGV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
WLDR Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF	29.55%	31.24%	23.69%
SFGV Sequoia Global Value ETF	11.37%	18.84%	10.71%

Correlation

The correlation between WLDR and SFGV is 0.66, 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	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 19, 2024	0.71

The correlation between WLDR and SFGV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

WLDR vs. SFGV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	WLDR	SFGV
Technology	29.9%	11.4%
Financial Services	13.4%	10.5%
Communication Services	10.9%	3.4%
Consumer Defensive	9.1%	8.8%
Healthcare	9.1%	12.7%
Industrials	8.6%	13.7%
Consumer Cyclical	6.2%	15.3%
Energy	4.7%	11.4%
Basic Materials	3.5%	6.0%
Utilities	2.7%	1.0%
Real Estate	1.9%	5.9%

Return for Risk

WLDR vs. SFGV — Risk / Return Rank

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

WLDR

WLDR Risk / Return Rank: 94
WLDR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
WLDR Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
WLDR Omega Ratio Rank: 93
WLDR Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
WLDR Martin Ratio Rank: 94

SFGV

SFGV Risk / Return Rank: 66
SFGV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
SFGV Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
SFGV Omega Ratio Rank: 66
SFGV Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
SFGV Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

WLDR vs. SFGV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	WLDR	SFGV	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.83	2.21	+1.62
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	5.08	3.17	+1.91
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.65	1.39	+0.25
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.48	3.06	+3.42
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	26.24	11.43	+14.80
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

WLDR vs. SFGV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WLDR Sharpe Ratio is 3.83, which is higher than the SFGV Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WLDR and SFGV, 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

	WLDR	SFGV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.83	2.21	+1.62
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.06	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.60	1.33	-0.73

Drawdowns

WLDR vs. SFGV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WLDR drawdown since its inception was -44.69%, which is greater than SFGV's maximum drawdown of -14.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WLDR and SFGV.

Drawdown Indicators

	WLDR	SFGV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.69%	-14.51%	-30.18%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.86%	-8.36%	-0.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.30%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.77%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.46%	-0.38%	-1.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.63%	-1.89%	-6.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.18%	2.23%	-0.05%

Volatility

WLDR vs. SFGV - Volatility Comparison

Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF (WLDR) has a higher volatility of 5.63% compared to Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV) at 2.95%. This indicates that WLDR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SFGV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	WLDR	SFGV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.63%	2.95%	+2.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.11%	8.62%	+3.49%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.00%	11.58%	+3.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.22%	13.26%	+3.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.94%	13.26%	+7.68%

WLDR vs. SFGV - Expense Ratio Comparison

WLDR has a 0.67% expense ratio, which is higher than SFGV's 0.33% expense ratio.

Dividends

WLDR vs. SFGV - Dividend Comparison

WLDR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.05%, more than SFGV's 2.25% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
SFGV Sequoia Global Value ETF	2.25%	2.52%	2.23%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
WLDR Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF	7.05%	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 SFGV in my portfolio?

WLDR and SFGV have a correlation of 0.66, 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 SFGV?

WLDR has higher volatility (5.63%) compared to SFGV (2.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WLDR dropped -44.69% vs SFGV's -14.51%.

Which ETF is better, WLDR or SFGV?

On 1-year performance, WLDR leads with 57.12% vs 25.44% for SFGV. On fees, SFGV is cheaper at 0.33% per year. On volatility, SFGV has been the lower-risk option at 2.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, WLDR or SFGV?

Over the 1-year period, WLDR has performed better with a 57.12% return vs 25.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, WLDR or SFGV?

SFGV is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.67% for WLDR.

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

WLDR has the higher dividend yield at 7.05%, compared with 2.25% for SFGV.

What is the main difference between WLDR and SFGV?

They also come from different issuers: Regents Park Funds and Sequoia. Their fees differ too: 0.67% for WLDR and 0.33% for SFGV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

WLDR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.83 vs 2.21), 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.