AWF vs FLGV
AllianceBernstein Global High Income Fund vs Franklin US Treasury Bond ETF
Quick Verdict
FLGV has a lower expense ratio. FLGV delivered stronger 1-year returns. AWF offers more diversification with 1,273 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | AWF | FLGV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.00% | 0.09% | |
| AUM | $973M | $1.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 6.98% | 4.23% | |
| Holdings | 1,273 | 51 | |
| YTD Return | -0.58% | -0.13% | |
| 1Y Return | -1.77% | +1.80% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +8.69% | +3.75% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +3.83% | -0.54% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.2% | 5.0% | |
| Max Drawdown | -60.0% | -18.4% | |
| Fund Family | AllianceBernstein L.P. | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Fixed Income | |
| Inception | Jul 28, 1993 | Jun 9, 2020 |
AWF vs FLGV Performance
AllianceBernstein Global High Income Fund (AWF) is a ETF from AllianceBernstein L.P. and Franklin US Treasury Bond ETF (FLGV) is a ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US). Over the past year AWF returned -1.77% while FLGV returned +1.80%. Year to date, AWF is down 0.58% versus a loss of 0.13% for FLGV.
Over three years, AWF compounded at +8.69% per year against +3.75% for FLGV; over five years the annualized figures are +3.83% and -0.54% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, AWF has the edge at +0.93% annualized vs -0.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
AWF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.2% compared with 5.0% for FLGV. 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 -60.0% for AWF and -18.4% for FLGV. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.51. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AWF charges 1.00% per year while FLGV charges 0.09%. On a $10,000 position that is $100 vs $9 annually, a gap of $91 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AWF currently yields 6.98% against 4.23% for FLGV.
Holdings Overlap
AWF and FLGV share 0 holdings out of 708 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, AWF or FLGV?
AWF has an expense ratio of 1.00% while FLGV charges 0.09%. FLGV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $91 per year of difference.
Which performed better, AWF or FLGV?
Over the past year AWF returned -1.77% vs +1.80% for FLGV, so FLGV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), AWF annualized +0.93% vs -0.85% for FLGV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, AWF or FLGV?
AWF has been the more volatile fund at 18.2% annualized versus 5.0% for FLGV. Worst drawdown: AWF -60.0% vs FLGV -18.4%.
Should I hold both AWF and FLGV?
AWF and FLGV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.51, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between AWF and FLGV?
AWF and FLGV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 708 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, AWF or FLGV?
AWF yields 6.98% while FLGV yields 4.23%, so AWF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.