Keep tabs on your favorite ETFs with a personalized weekly tracker. Create a Watchlist now →
KONGvsBIBLETF Comparison
Formidable Fortress ETF (KONG) belongs to the Global Blended Cap segment. Inspire 100 ESG ETF (BIBL) is part of the US Large Cap segment. KONG's top 3 sector exposures are Information Technology, Industrials and Health Care. In contrast, BIBL's top sector exposures are Information Technology, Industrials and Real Estate. KONG is more expensive with a Total Expense Ratio (TER) of 0.89%, versus 0.41% for BIBL. KONG is up 1.52% year-to-date (YTD) with - in YTD flows. BIBL performs better with 7.89% YTD performance, and +$5M in YTD flows. Run a side-by-side ETF comparison of KONG and BIBL below, and assess how they stack up in performance, liquidity, risk, exposure, holdings, and more, helping you select the best ETF for your investments.
KONG vs BIBL performance and flow charts
Performance
Cumulative Flows
| 1M | 3M | YTD | 1Y | 3Y | 5Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perf. | KONG BIBL | +0.55%-1.82% | +2.42%+7.46% | +1.52%+7.89% | +7.42%+28.30% | +29.83%+61.79% | n/a+59.86% |
| Flows | KONG BIBL | -+$12M | -+$8M | -+$5M | -$1M+$15M | -$7M-$43M | -+$118M |
| 3M | 1Y | 3Y | 5Y | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Volatility | KONG BIBL | +11.23%+17.73% | +14.08%+20.14% | +11.46%+17.08% | n/a+19.63% |
| Max drawdown | KONG BIBL | -3.42%-4.94% | -10.17%-14.51% | -15.24%-20.33% | n/a-30.90% |
| Max drawdown duration | KONG BIBL | 42d26d | 60d45d | 315d233d | n/a812d |
KONG | BIBL | |
Last sale 3/11/2026 at 1:30 PM | $48.32 | |
| Previous close 03/10/2026 | $48.67 | |
| Consolidated volume 03/10/2026 | ||
| Average volume 30 days | ||
| Average discount or premium 30 days | ||
| Average Bid/Ask spread 30 days |
Create an account to view replication metrics
KONG | BIBL | |
|---|---|---|
| Tracking error | ||
| Tracking difference | ||
| 1 year cumulative return difference | ||
| Best | ||
| Worst | ||
| Daily return difference | ||
| Average | ||
| Worst | ||
KONG | BIBL | |
|---|---|---|
| Last price | – | $48.32 |
| 1D performance | – | -0.72% |
| AuM | $22.44 M | $394.23 M |
| E/R | 0.89% | 0.41% |
KONG | BIBL | |
|---|---|---|
| Management strategy | Active | Passive |
| Provider | Formidable | Inspire ETFs |
| Benchmark | - | Inspire 100 Index |
| N° of holdings | 34 | 98 |
| Asset class | - | Equities |
| Trailing 12m distribution yield | Join | Join |
| Inception date | July 21, 2021 | October 31, 2017 |
| ESG | No | No |
Countries
Sectors
Diversification
Total weight of top 15 holdings out of 15
Total weight of top 15 holdings out of 15
Top 15 holdings
How have the KONG and BIBL ETFs performed in 2026?
As of March 9, 2026, KONG is up 1.52% year-to-date (YTD), while BIBL has returned 7.89%. That puts BIBL better performer ahead so far this year.
Which ETF is attracting more investor money: KONG or BIBL?
Year-to-date, the KONG ETF saw - in flows, compared to +$5M for BIBL.
Which ETF is more volatile: KONG or BIBL?
Over the past year, KONG had a volatility of 14.08%, while BIBL experienced 20.14%.
Which ETF is bigger: KONG or BIBL?
As of March 9, 2026, KONG holds $22.44 M in assets under management (AUM), while BIBL manages $394.23 M.
What sectors do the KONG and BIBL ETFs invest in?
KONG leans toward sectors like Information Technology, Industrials and Health Care. Meanwhile, BIBL focuses on Information Technology, Industrials and Real Estate.
What are the top holdings of the KONG ETF and BIBL ETF?
KONG top holdings include META PLATFORMS, INTERACTIVE BROKERS GROUP and NVIDIA. BIBL holds in its top three: CATERPILLAR, KLA CORPORATION and ARISTA NETWORKS.
Which ETF is more diversified: KONG or BIBL?
KONG holds 34 securities with 51.8% of its assets in the top 15. BIBL has 98 securities and a top 15 weight of 47.88%.
Active Trader Report: Use of Leveraged & Inverse ETFs Way Up
Direxion partnered with Compound Insights and Vanda to explore what’s driving the evolution of active trading — and how active traders are using leveraged and inverse funds across equities, single stocks, commodities, and volatility.
