ECML vs WBIF
Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF vs WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF
Which is better, ECML or WBIF?
ECML has been ahead.
ECML has a lower expense ratio. ECML led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ECML | WBIF |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.95%Best | 1.65% |
| AUM | $126M | $23M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.17% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 130 | 152 |
| YTD Return | +18.99%Best | +14.87% |
| 1Y Return | +24.66%Best | +15.37% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +14.57%Best | +10.35% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +4.01% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.8% | 13.7%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -25.4% | -17.2%Best |
| $10,000 over 3.4 years | $16,212Best | $13,640 |
| Fund Family | Euclidean Technologies | WBI Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | May 18, 2023 | Aug 25, 2014 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.4 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: May 18, 2023 to Oct 14, 2026 (3.4 years).
ECML vs WBIF growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 3.4 years both funds cover.
ECML vs WBIF Performance
Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF (ECML) is an ETF from Euclidean Technologies and WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF) is an ETF from WBI Investments. Over the past year ECML returned +24.66% while WBIF returned +15.37%. Year to date, ECML is up 18.99% versus a gain of 14.87% for WBIF.
Over three years, ECML compounded at +14.57% per year against +10.35% for WBIF.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ECML has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.8% compared with 13.7% for WBIF. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -25.4% for ECML and -17.2% for WBIF. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.80. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ECML charges 0.95% per year while WBIF charges 1.65%. On a $10,000 position that is $95 vs $165 annually, a gap of $70 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ECML currently yields 1.17% against 0.00% for WBIF.
Holdings Overlap
At least 5.7% of ECML's money is in holdings WBIF also owns.
Stated as a floor: for WBIF, our book for it covers 83.6% of that fund, so a holding it does not list is one we cannot count as shared. The real figure is this or higher.
ECML and WBIF share little of their money.
3 positions in common, counted across the 64 positions we hold weights for in ECML and 62 in WBIF, against full books of 130 and 152.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of ECML and WBIF you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ECML or WBIF?
ECML has an expense ratio of 0.95% while WBIF charges 1.65%. ECML is the cheaper option, by $70 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ECML or WBIF?
Over the past year ECML returned +24.66% vs +15.37% for WBIF, so ECML leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ECML or WBIF?
ECML has been the more volatile fund at 18.8% annualized versus 13.7% for WBIF. Worst drawdown: ECML -25.4% vs WBIF -17.2%.
Should I hold both ECML and WBIF?
ECML and WBIF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.80, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between ECML and WBIF?
At least 5.7% of ECML's money is in holdings WBIF also owns. Our book for WBIF is partial, so the real figure is this or higher. They hold 3 positions in common, counted across the 64 positions we hold weights for in ECML and 62 in WBIF.
Which pays a higher dividend, ECML or WBIF?
ECML yields 1.17% while WBIF yields 0.00%, so ECML currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is WBIF better than ECML?
ECML has a lower expense ratio. ECML led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.