How do BUG's expense ratio compare with WCBR's expense ratio?

BUG has an expense ratio of 0.50% while WCBR's expense ratio is 0.45%. This 0.05 percentage point difference means that for every £1,000 invested, WCBR theoretically costs £0.50 less annually than BUG. However, lower fees do not necessarily translate to better net returns; other factors like tracking error and liquidity are crucial. Investors should consider these fees as part of the total cost of ownership, rather than the sole decision-making factor when comparing ETFs.

What are the dividend yields for BUG and WCBR?

BUG reports a dividend yield of 0.03%, while WCBR has a yield of 0.00%. This indicates that both funds are primarily growth-oriented, prioritising capital appreciation over regular income distributions. The negligible yields suggest that most earnings are retained within the companies or reinvested into the fund rather than paid out. Investors seeking steady cash flow may find these cybersecurity ETFs less suitable compared to income-focused assets.

Do BUG and WCBR have any top holdings?

Both BUG and WCBR feature significant top holdings. BUG's largest positions include OKTA at 9.03% and CRWD at 7.77%, indicating a heavy emphasis on key cybersecurity players. Conversely, WCBR's top holdings are led by CRWD at 8.02%, followed by OKTA at 6.47%. The inclusion of S, DDOG, and TENB further distinguishes WCBR's top ten holdings from those of BUG.

How do inception dates affect the comparison between BUG and WCBR?

BUG was launched on October 25, 2019, while WCBR began trading on January 28, 2021. This nearly two-year difference means BUG has a longer operational history, potentially offering more data for analysing performance consistency. Investors often value longer track records for assessing how a fund behaves across different market cycles, though WCBR's newer structure might reflect updated investment methodologies or strategic choices by WisdomTree.

How does net assets affect BUG and WCBR?

BUG boasts net assets of $1.9 billion, providing significant liquidity and depth for investors. In contrast, WCBR has $161 million in net assets. Generally, larger funds are more liquid due to higher trading volumes, resulting in tighter bid-ask spreads and easier transactions. Smaller funds may be susceptible to price volatility from large individual trades and potentially have higher bid-ask spreads. It is crucial to ensure that your trading activity aligns with the liquidity available in the respective fund.

What cybersecurity themes do BUG and WCBR represent?

Both BUG and WCBR are exchange-traded funds dedicated to the cybersecurity sector, reflecting increasing demand for digital security solutions. However, they may differ slightly in the companies they hold and the weightings they assign to them. Understanding their respective approaches to cybersecurity exposure helps investors grasp the nuances of each fund's strategy and how it might contribute to portfolio diversification.

Is a 0.05% fee difference significant over time?

The 0.05 percentage point difference in expense ratios (BUG at 0.50% versus WCBR at 0.45%) can compound over time. While the impact on a small investment may be negligible, for larger amounts it is worth noting that lower fees contribute to slightly better net returns. However, fee differences should be weighed alongside other factors such as tracking error, liquidity, and performance metrics to fully understand their long-term implications.

What are the sector weights for BUG and WCBR?

Sector weights for both BUG and WCBR are not available. Typically, cybersecurity ETFs are classified under technology sector investments, but detailed sector breakdowns can vary. Without specific data, investors should refer to each fund's official documentation for insights into the precise sector composition and how these funds are positioned within the broader technology landscape.

How can I determine the performance of BUG and WCBR?

Investors often evaluate performance by comparing historical returns against relevant benchmarks or sector indices. Given that BUG and WCBR focus on cybersecurity, it may be helpful to review their returns against cybersecurity market trends, industry indices, and other comparable funds. Historical data can provide insights, but remember that past performance is not indicative of future results, and you should always assess multiple performance factors.

How do the two funds handle concentration risk?

BUG concentrates over 60% of its portfolio in the top 10 holdings, which might heighten concentration risk as the fund relies heavily on a few companies. WCBR, while also concentrated in top holdings, diversifies slightly more with a different composition, including companies like Datadog and Tenable. Investors should consider these risks when assessing their exposure to the cybersecurity sector.

BUG vs WCBR

Two funds, one decision: we compare cost, performance and what each ETF actually holds in September 2026.

Compare BUG (Global X Fds Cybersecurity Etf) and WCBR (Wisdomtree Cybersecurity). This page reviews fees, holdings, dividends and how each fund tracks its market. Global X charges 0.50% expense ratio while WisdomTree charges 0.45%. Net assets stand at $1.9 billion for BUG versus $161 million for WCBR. Both focus on cybersecurity technology companies. Educational content, not financial advice.

Compare BUG (Global X Fds Cybersecurity Etf) and WCBR (Wisdomtree Cybersecurity). This page reviews fees, holdings, dividends and how each fund tracks its market. Global X charges 0.50% expense ratio ...

Fund Snapshot

Key Fund Metrics

BUG

Metric

WCBR

0.50%

Expense Ratio

0.45%

0.03%

Dividend Yield

0.00%

$1.87B

Net Assets

$161.15M

34

Holdings

32

Oct 25, 2019

Inception Date

Jan 28, 2021

–

Index Tracked

–

Technology

Fund Category

Technology

WCBR costs about $5.00 less per year for every $10,000 invested.

Shared Top Holdings

Holding	BUG	WCBR
OKTAOkta, Inc.	9.03%	6.47%
CRWDCrowdStrike Holdings, Inc.	7.77%	8.02%
PANWPalo Alto Networks, Inc.	7.39%	6.06%
FTNTFortinet, Inc.	7.34%	5.64%
ZSZscaler, Inc.	5.50%	4.85%
RBRKRubrik, Inc.	5.48%	5.54%
NTSKNetskope, Inc.	4.80%	5.13%

Discover More Comparisons

BUG vs HACK

Compare BUG and HACK cybersecurity ETFs. Review expense ratios, assets, dividends and holdings to assess fee and portfolio differences between these funds.

BUG vs IHAK

Compare Global X Cybersecurity ETF (BUG) and iShares Cybersecurity and Tech ETF (IHAK) by examining fees, holdings, dividend yields and fund structures.

BUG vs CIBR

Compare BUG and CIBR cybersecurity ETFs. Review expense ratios, net assets, dividend yields and top holdings to assess tracking differences and suitability.

Investment Analysis

BUG

Pros

The ETF's $19 billion in net assets provides significant liquidity for investors.
Global X's established reputation adds credibility to the fund's management and operations.
A 050% expense ratio is competitive for a specialised cybersecurity sector fund.

Considerations

The fund's dividend yield is negligible at just 003% per annum.
The top 10 holdings represent over 60% of the portfolio concentrating risk.
The index tracked is not specified limiting transparency on the methodology.

WCBR

Pros

WisdomTree offers a lower cost structure with a 045% expense ratio.
The fund diversifies slightly more by including Datadog and Tenable in top holdings.
It avoids direct duplication of the top holding weights seen in the larger competitor fund.

Considerations

With only $161 million in net assets the fund is considerably smaller.
Inception in early 2021 means a shorter track record than its larger peer.
No yield is generated from the fund as the dividend yield is 000%.

Related Market Insights

Cybersecurity's Regulatory Reset: Why the SEC's SolarWinds Retreat Changes Everything

The SEC's SolarWinds retreat removes liability fears, unlocking corporate cybersecurity spending. Discover investment opportunities in leading firms like Palo Alto, CrowdStrike & Fortinet.