FAAR vs SBIO
FAAR vs SBIO
First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF vs ALPS Medical Breakthroughs ETF
Quick Verdict
SBIO has a lower expense ratio. SBIO delivered stronger 1-year returns. SBIO offers more diversification with 105 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FAAR | SBIO | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.97% | 0.50% | |
| AUM | $191M | $202M | |
| Dividend Yield | 9.19% | 4.05% | |
| Holdings | 6 | 87 | |
| YTD Return | +13.94% | +34.80% | |
| 1Y Return | +19.26% | +106.24% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +8.78% | +32.77% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.33% | +9.56% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 9.2% | 29.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -18.8% | -63.1% | |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | ALPS Advisors | |
| Category | Commodity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 18, 2016 | Dec 30, 2014 |
FAAR vs SBIO Performance
First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) is a ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and ALPS Medical Breakthroughs ETF (SBIO) is a ETF from ALPS Advisors. Over the past year FAAR returned +19.26% while SBIO returned +106.24%. Year to date, FAAR is up 13.94% versus a gain of 34.80% for SBIO.
Over three years, FAAR compounded at +8.78% per year against +32.77% for SBIO; over five years the annualized figures are +7.33% and +9.56% respectively. Across the full 10-year window we track, SBIO has the edge at +9.80% annualized vs +3.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SBIO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 29.6% compared with 9.2% for FAAR. 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 -18.8% for FAAR and -63.1% for SBIO. 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 -0.04. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FAAR charges 0.97% per year while SBIO charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $97 vs $50 annually, a gap of $47 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FAAR currently yields 9.19% against 4.05% for SBIO.
Holdings Overlap
FAAR and SBIO share 0 holdings out of 106 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, FAAR or SBIO?
FAAR has an expense ratio of 0.97% while SBIO charges 0.50%. SBIO is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $47 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FAAR or SBIO?
Over the past year FAAR returned +19.26% vs +106.24% for SBIO, so SBIO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (10 years), FAAR annualized +3.32% vs +9.80% for SBIO. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FAAR or SBIO?
SBIO has been the more volatile fund at 29.6% annualized versus 9.2% for FAAR. Worst drawdown: FAAR -18.8% vs SBIO -63.1%.
Should I hold both FAAR and SBIO?
FAAR and SBIO have a monthly-return correlation of -0.04, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between FAAR and SBIO?
FAAR and SBIO share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 106 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FAAR or SBIO?
FAAR yields 9.19% while SBIO yields 4.05%, so FAAR 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.