WM vs. XLF
WM (Waste Management, Inc.) is a stock, while XLF (State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF) is Financials Equities fund tracking the Financial Select Sector Index. Over the past 10 years, WM returned 15.25%/yr vs 12.79%/yr for XLF. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
WM vs. XLF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, WM achieves a -0.81% return, which is significantly higher than XLF's -4.62% return. Over the past 10 years, WM has outperformed XLF with an annualized return of 15.25%, while XLF has yielded a comparatively lower 12.79% annualized return.
WM
- 1D
- -1.93%
- 1M
- 0.79%
- YTD
- -0.81%
- 6M
- 3.67%
- 1Y
- -7.08%
- 3Y*
- 11.63%
- 5Y*
- 10.86%
- 10Y*
- 15.25%
XLF
- 1D
- -0.63%
- 1M
- 1.42%
- YTD
- -4.62%
- 6M
- -1.98%
- 1Y
- 2.91%
- 3Y*
- 18.06%
- 5Y*
- 8.47%
- 10Y*
- 12.79%
WM vs. XLF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
WM Waste Management, Inc. | -0.81% | 10.50% | 14.28% | 16.20% | -4.49% | 43.82% | 5.46% | 30.45% | 5.32% | 24.46% |
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF | -4.62% | 14.90% | 30.56% | 12.03% | -10.59% | 34.80% | -1.74% | 31.88% | -13.06% | 22.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between WM and XLF is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.28 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.35 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.38 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 23, 1998 | 0.43 |
Over the past year, the correlation between WM and XLF has dropped to 0.18 - well below their long-term average of 0.43, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
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
WM vs. XLF — Risk / Return Rank
WM
XLF
WM vs. XLF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Waste Management, Inc. (WM) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF). 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.
| WM | XLF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.58 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.78 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.95 | 1.05 | -0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.43 | 0.20 | -0.62 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.95 | 0.51 | -1.46 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| WM | XLF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.38 | 0.20 | -0.58 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.59 | 0.46 | +0.13 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.78 | 0.58 | +0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.36 | 0.21 | +0.16 |
Drawdowns
WM vs. XLF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum WM drawdown since its inception was -77.85%, smaller than the maximum XLF drawdown of -82.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WM and XLF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| WM | XLF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -77.85% | -82.69% | +4.84% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -16.72% | -14.79% | -1.93% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.14% | -15.54% | -2.60% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.14% | -25.81% | +7.67% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -30.07% | -42.86% | +12.79% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -11.59% | -7.38% | -4.21% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -17.69% | -20.02% | +2.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 7.49% | 5.71% | +1.78% |
Volatility
WM vs. XLF - Volatility Comparison
Waste Management, Inc. (WM) has a higher volatility of 5.91% compared to State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) at 4.20%. This indicates that WM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| WM | XLF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.91% | 4.20% | +1.71% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.69% | 11.18% | +2.51% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.73% | 14.61% | +4.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.55% | 18.66% | -0.11% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.51% | 22.18% | -2.67% |
Dividends
WM vs. XLF - Dividend Comparison
WM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.64%, more than XLF's 1.52% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
WM Waste Management, Inc. | 1.64% | 1.50% | 1.49% | 1.56% | 1.66% | 1.38% | 1.85% | 1.80% | 2.09% | 1.97% | 2.31% | 2.89% |
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF | 1.52% | 1.31% | 1.42% | 1.71% | 2.04% | 1.63% | 2.03% | 1.87% | 2.08% | 1.48% | 21.10% | 1.95% |
Frequently Asked Questions
WM and XLF have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
WM has higher volatility (5.91%) compared to XLF (4.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WM dropped -77.85% vs XLF's -82.69%.
XLF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.20 vs -0.38), 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.
Find the right allocation for WM and XLF
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