Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
BWET vs HYMB: how they differ
BWET is a commodity fund and HYMB a bond index fund, and over the year BWET returned more, +5129.6% against +1.7%.
Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF and State Street(R) SPDR Nuveen ICE High Yield Municipal Bond ETF.
| BWET Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF | HYMB State Street(R) SPDR Nuveen ICE High Yield Municipal Bond ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | Breakwave | State Street |
| What it is | Tanker Shipping | SPDR Nuveen ICE High Yield Municipal Bond |
| Total return, 1 year | +5129.6% | +1.7% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +5112.1 pts | −15.8 pts |
| Expense ratio | not published | 0.35% |
| Holdings | not filed | 1867 |
BWET in plain words
BWET is a commodity fund tracking the Tanker Shipping. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +5129.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100.
HYMB in plain words
HYMB is a bond fund tracking the SPDR Nuveen ICE High Yield Municipal Bond. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +1.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.35% a year. It sat 3.8% below its high of Jul 2, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, BWET or HYMB?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, BWET returned +5129.6% and HYMB returned +1.7%, so BWET returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Other comparisons
Where to next
Where these figures came from
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, BWET against HYMB, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/BWET-HYMB Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources