CIBR vs BUG ETF Comparison: AI Score, Valuation, Performance and Upside
CIBR and BUG are both cybersecurity ETFs tracking the same underlying theme (cybersecurity spending growth) with similar core holdings (CrowdStrike, Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet, Check Point) but different index methodologies — CIBR (First Trust) is the larger, more liquid fund tracking the Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index with broad cybersecurity sector coverage, while BUG (Global X) applies a revenue purity filter and includes more global cybersecurity exposure. The ETFs are closely correlated and the choice often comes down to fee and liquidity preferences.
CIBR vs BUG is large, liquid cybersecurity ETF with broad Nasdaq index coverage (First Trust's CIBR tracking the Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index with institutional liquidity and established methodology covering pure-play and cybersecurity-significant technology companies) versus smaller pure-play cybersecurity ETF with revenue purity filter and global scope (Global X's BUG applying a 50%+ cybersecurity revenue threshold and global company eligibility for concentrated cybersecurity-only exposure) — breadth and liquidity versus purity and global scope.
CIBR holds the edge across 3 of 5 key metrics in this comparison. CIBR has delivered stronger 1-year price return (+30.47% vs +25.84% for BUG).
- Want the largest, most liquid cybersecurity ETF with tight bid-ask spreads suitable for larger investment amounts — CIBR's institutional AUM size enables efficient trading at scale
- Value CIBR's established track record and broader cybersecurity sector coverage including companies with significant cybersecurity operations even if they're not pure-play cybersecurity businesses
- Prioritize index transparency and recognition — the Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index is a well-known, referenced benchmark for cybersecurity sector performance
- Prefer revenue purity filtering ensuring all BUG holdings derive at least 50% of revenue from cybersecurity, avoiding dilution from diversified technology conglomerates with incidental cybersecurity divisions
- Value global cybersecurity company exposure including Israeli cybersecurity innovators that may be underweighted in U.S.-index-focused cybersecurity ETFs like CIBR
- Are comfortable with BUG's smaller AUM and are investing amounts where the liquidity difference versus CIBR is immaterial
| Metric | CIBR | BUG |
|---|---|---|
| ETF scorei | 80.0 | 63.0 |
| Latest closei | $99.87 | $44.34 |
| 1M returni | +4.53% | +7.86% |
| 6M returni | +56.38% | +72.26% |
| 1Y returni | +30.47% | +25.84% |
The ETF score weights long-term returns and risk-adjusted performance most heavily, but still rewards low expense ratios, larger fund size, and broader diversification — so it can favor low-cost, broad, mega-cap funds over smaller thematic or actively-managed funds even when the latter have delivered stronger returns.
How much would $10,000 be worth today if invested at the start of each period, with all dividends reinvested?
| Period | CIBR | BUG |
|---|---|---|
| 1Y ago | $13.12K (+31.2%) started 2025-09-18 | $12.59K (+25.9%) started 2025-09-18 |
| 5Y ago | $20.93K (+109.3%) started 2021-09-20 | $14.9K (+49.0%) started 2021-09-20 |
| 10Y ago | $57.55K (+475.5%) started 2016-09-19 | $29.74K (+197.4%) started 2019-11-01 |
Hypothetical — past performance does not guarantee future results.
| Metric | CIBR | BUG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense ratioi | 0.58% | 0.50% |
| Total assets (AUM)i | $16.12B | $1.73B |
| Dividend yieldi | 0.39% | 0.03% |
| Trailing P/Ei | 33.10 | 37.35 |
| Betai | 0.92 | 0.88 |
| 52-week change | 30.47% | 25.84% |
| Metric | CIBR | BUG |
|---|---|---|
| 1Y returni | +30.47% | +25.84% |
| 6M returni | +56.38% | +72.26% |
| 1M returni | +4.53% | +7.86% |
| 1Y Sharpe ratio | 0.91 | 0.69 |
| Betai | 0.92 | 0.88 |
| Dividend yieldi | 0.39% | 0.03% |
| 5Y CAGR | +15.41% | +7.78% |
Over the past year, CIBR and BUG have moved strongly in the same direction (correlation of 0.95), based on daily returns.
Lower drawdown and smaller single-period drops generally indicate a smoother ride, though they do not guarantee lower future risk.
| Period | Metric | CIBR | BUG |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1Y | Growthi | +30.47% | +25.84% |
| CAGRi | +30.49% | +25.86% | |
| Volatilityi | 28.80% | 37.03% | |
| Sharpe ratioi | 0.91 | 0.69 | |
| Sortino ratioi | 1.41 | 1.05 | |
| Max drawdowni | 21.99% | 35.16% | |
| Current drawdowni | 2.28% | 2.16% | |
| Avg drawdowni | 7.56% | 12.90% | |
| Ulcer Indexi | 9.67% | 16.22% | |
| Max daily dropi | 4.41% | 5.54% | |
| Max wkly dropi | 10.58% | 12.87% | |
| 5Y | Growthi | +104.61% | +45.37% |
| CAGRi | +15.41% | +7.78% | |
| Volatilityi | 25.95% | 30.14% | |
| Sharpe ratioi | 0.51 | 0.25 | |
| Sortino ratioi | 0.73 | 0.36 | |
| Max drawdowni | 33.89% | 41.66% | |
| Current drawdowni | 2.28% | 2.16% | |
| Avg drawdowni | 11.49% | 17.21% | |
| Ulcer Indexi | 15.01% | 20.45% | |
| Max daily dropi | 6.47% | 6.75% | |
| Max wkly dropi | 16.84% | 15.49% | |
| 10Y | Growthi | +448.23% | +187.65% |
| CAGRi | +18.56% | +16.60% | |
| Volatilityi | 24.01% | 30.12% | |
| Sharpe ratioi | 0.64 | 0.51 | |
| Sortino ratioi | 0.91 | 0.74 | |
| Max drawdowni | 33.89% | 41.66% | |
| Current drawdowni | 2.28% | 2.16% | |
| Avg drawdowni | 7.86% | 14.06% | |
| Ulcer Indexi | 11.56% | 17.96% | |
| Max daily dropi | 10.03% | 8.66% | |
| Max wkly dropi | 20.35% | 19.76% |
| Category | CIBR | BUG |
|---|---|---|
| Fund name | First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF | Global X Cybersecurity ETF |
| Type | ETF | ETF |
| Expense ratioi | 0.58% | 0.50% |
| Total assets (AUM)i | $16.12B | $1.73B |
| Dividend yieldi | 0.39% | 0.03% |
- Largest and most liquid cybersecurity ETF with broad index coverage — CIBR's size and liquidity enable institutional investment; larger AUM typically means tighter bid-ask spreads and more efficient trading; the Nasdaq CTA index has well-defined, transparent methodology
- Pure-play cybersecurity companies dominate the portfolio — CIBR holds Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike, Fortinet, Okta, and other dedicated cybersecurity companies rather than technology conglomerates with small security divisions
- Secular demand growth driven by escalating threat landscape — cyberattacks (ransomware, state-sponsored attacks, supply chain compromises) are increasing in frequency and severity; enterprise security budgets consistently grow faster than overall IT spending as organizations prioritize defense
- Revenue purity filter ensures cybersecurity focus — BUG's 50%+ cybersecurity revenue requirement eliminates diversified technology companies from the index; holdings are genuinely cybersecurity-primary businesses rather than adjacent technology companies with small security divisions
- Global cybersecurity exposure including Israeli companies — Israeli cybersecurity companies (Check Point, CyberArk, Varonis, Wiz prior to IPO) are among the world's most innovative; BUG's global mandate captures the Israeli cybersecurity ecosystem that is underrepresented in U.S.-only indices
- Smaller fund size can provide purer small/mid-cap cybersecurity exposure — smaller AUM means BUG can hold smaller cybersecurity companies proportionally; smaller cybersecurity companies may have higher growth rates than large-cap pure-plays
- Cybersecurity company valuations carry premium growth expectations — cybersecurity companies trade at high revenue multiples; any deceleration in growth rates or margin expansion timelines can lead to significant multiple compression despite continued business growth
- Platform consolidation trend may benefit large-cap players at expense of best-of-breed point solutions — CISOs are reducing vendor complexity by consolidating security tools on fewer platforms (Palo Alto Networks' platformization strategy); this benefits large-scale cybersecurity vendors but pressures smaller point-solution companies also in CIBR
- Government budget sensitivity — CIBR includes companies with significant federal cybersecurity contracts (Booz Allen Hamilton, Leidos, CACI, SAIC); government IT security spending is subject to budget cycle timing
- Smaller AUM means potentially wider bid-ask spreads and less trading liquidity than CIBR — investors trading large blocks of BUG may experience market impact costs that don't apply to CIBR
- Revenue purity filter creates rebalancing risk at index reconstitution — companies that fall below the 50% cybersecurity revenue threshold are removed from the index; any large, well-performing company that diversifies beyond cybersecurity would be removed
- Similar holdings to CIBR mean low differentiation in core portfolio — both ETFs hold CrowdStrike, Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet, and Check Point as major positions; despite methodology differences, the core cybersecurity universe overlap is substantial
Want deeper AI forecasts?
This comparison page is public and free forever. Subscribers can unlock saved watchlists, full AI rankings, detailed forecasts, and interactive analysis tools.