AWF vs IZRL
AWF vs IZRL
AllianceBernstein Global High Income Fund vs ARK Israel Innovative Technology ETF
Quick Verdict
IZRL has a lower expense ratio. IZRL delivered stronger 1-year returns. AWF offers more diversification with 707 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | AWF | IZRL | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.00% | 0.49% | |
| AUM | $969M | $142M | |
| Dividend Yield | 6.92% | 2.55% | |
| Holdings | 1,273 | 63 | |
| YTD Return | -1.51% | -0.27% | |
| 1Y Return | -2.78% | +13.01% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +8.35% | +15.44% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +3.44% | +0.04% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.2% | 23.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -60.0% | -60.0% | |
| Fund Family | AllianceBernstein L.P. | Ark Invest | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Jul 28, 1993 | Dec 4, 2017 |
AWF vs IZRL Performance
AllianceBernstein Global High Income Fund (AWF) is a ETF from AllianceBernstein L.P. and ARK Israel Innovative Technology ETF (IZRL) is a ETF from Ark Invest. Over the past year AWF returned -2.78% while IZRL returned +13.01%. Year to date, AWF is down 1.51% versus a loss of 0.27% for IZRL.
Over three years, AWF compounded at +8.35% per year against +15.44% for IZRL; over five years the annualized figures are +3.44% and +0.04% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, IZRL has the edge at +5.46% annualized vs +0.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IZRL has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 23.5% compared with 18.2% for AWF. 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 -60.0% for IZRL. 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 0.65. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AWF charges 1.00% per year while IZRL charges 0.49%. On a $10,000 position that is $100 vs $49 annually, a gap of $51 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AWF currently yields 6.92% against 2.55% for IZRL.
Holdings Overlap
AWF and IZRL share 0 holdings out of 773 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 IZRL?
AWF has an expense ratio of 1.00% while IZRL charges 0.49%. IZRL is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $51 per year of difference.
Which performed better, AWF or IZRL?
Over the past year AWF returned -2.78% vs +13.01% for IZRL, so IZRL leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), AWF annualized +0.90% vs +5.46% for IZRL. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, AWF or IZRL?
IZRL has been the more volatile fund at 23.5% annualized versus 18.2% for AWF. Worst drawdown: AWF -60.0% vs IZRL -60.0%.
Should I hold both AWF and IZRL?
AWF and IZRL have a monthly-return correlation of 0.65, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between AWF and IZRL?
AWF and IZRL share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 773 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, AWF or IZRL?
AWF yields 6.92% while IZRL yields 2.55%, 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.