FITE vs PWRD: Grades, Fees and Holdings Compared

State Street SPDR S&P Kensho Future Security ETF

FITEANYSE Arca

TCW Transform Systems ETF

PWRDCNasdaq

Overlap

2.3%by weight

Expense ratio

FITE −0.30pt a year

FITE0.45%PWRD0.75%

Avg volume · 30D

PWRD 13.4×the volume

FITE7.11KPWRD95.4K

3Y return · a year

FITE +9.2pt

FITE+34.2%PWRD+25.0%

FITE vs PWRD Performance

Oct 31, 2025 – Oct 30, 2026

+24.6%FITE−4.6%PWRD

Expense ratio: FITE 0.45%, better; PWRD 0.75%
Fund size: FITE $161M; PWRD $1.42B
1Y total return: FITE +24.6%, better; PWRD −4.6%
Yield (12M): FITE 0.11%, better; PWRD 0.06%
Holdings: FITE 79; PWRD 29
Avg volume (30D): FITE 7.11K sh; PWRD 95.4K sh, better
NAV per share: FITE $115.25; PWRD $97.55
52W range

ETF.net Grade

Pillar letters and Scores for FITE, PWRD, with each pillar’s weight
Pillar	FITE	PWRD
Cost30% weight	A83Higher	F19
Mission25% weight	Not scored	Not scored
Risk15% weight	A71Higher	C49
Tradability15% weight	A78	A89Higher
Holdings10% weight	A82Higher	C49
Durability5% weight	A82Higher	A76

Rank among Global Thematic funds

How we build Categories ›

Same Category. FITE and PWRD are both graded against the same 18 Global Thematic funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Global Thematic⁠

Category · 18 funds

See all 18 ›

FITE ranks 1st and PWRD 9th of 18 funds in the Global Thematic Category.

Rank 1AFITEState Street SPDR S&P Kensho Future Security ETFScore 79
Rank 2AAGNGGlobal X Aging Population ETFScore 70
Rank 8CCOPXGlobal X Copper Miners ETFScore 48
Rank 9CPWRDTCW Transform Systems ETFScore 46
Rank 9CTINYProShares Nanotechnology ETFScore 46

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

FITEAState Street SPDR S&P Kensho Future Security ETF

PWRDCTCW Transform Systems ETF

In short

FITE Most "security" funds mean cybersecurity. FITE reads the word wider: cyber plus border security, robotics, drones, space, wearables and AR/VR, bundled into one global index basket since 2017.

PWRD A concentrated global bet on the machinery of energy: roughly 30 companies tied to how the world sources, produces and consumes power. Broader than a solar index, and far narrower than a sector fund.

Stated mandate

FITE The fund seeks to track the S&P Kensho Future Security Index, targeting companies whose products and services support future security through areas such as cybersecurity, border security, robotics, drones, space, wearables, and virtual or augmented reality.

PWRD The fund seeks long-term capital growth by investing in companies expected to benefit from worldwide changes in the systems used to source, produce, and consume energy and power.

Why people hold it

FITE One theme, many fronts: cybersecurity, border security, robotics, drones, space, wearables and virtual/augmented reality all sit inside the same index.ssga.com
A 0.45% fee undercuts the typical global thematic fund, and it comes from State Street's SPDR lineup rather than a one-fund boutique.
Live since 2017, so it has traded through a full cycle of thematic hype and hangover instead of arriving on a back-test.
Roughly 80 names spread across sectors and countries, so no single defense contractor or chipmaker steers the whole portfolio.ssga.com

PWRD One idea, roughly 30 stocks, worldwide. The mandate covers the whole chain (sourcing, production, consumption), so it reaches well beyond power generators.
A multi-billion-dollar fund that trades at moderate volume: unusual heft for a single-theme portfolio this narrow.
Trading since 2022, so there is a multi-year live record to judge instead of a backtest.

Worth knowing

FITE Thinly traded next to broad index funds, which can mean wider bid-ask spreads at the moment you transact.
Small by SPDR standards. Niche thematic funds lean on sustained investor interest to hold their scale.
"Security" is drawn by index rules, so wearables and AR headset makers land beside the cyber and border names.

PWRD At 0.75% a year, it costs more than the typical global thematic ETF. Cheaper options sit in the same group, including KLMT at 0.10% and IQSZ at 0.19%.
With roughly 30 holdings, a handful of names steer the outcome, and a single-theme portfolio can look nothing like a broad global index.
Payouts come once or twice a year. The stated goal is long-term capital growth, not income.

Full FITE profile⁠

Full PWRD profile⁠

FITE vs PWRD Holdings

How FITE and PWRD differ

Overlap by weight

2.3%

Shared holdings make up 6.5% of PWRD and 2.3% of FITE.

Level by level

Holdings2 in both2.3%
Countryby domicile83.9%
Asset classEquity100%

Sector

No Sector split for PWRD.

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Country weights in FITE and PWRD, widest gap first
Country	More in FITEMore in PWRD	FITE	PWRD
United States	FITE +10.3 points	92.2%	81.9%
France	PWRD +5.0 points	0.0%	5.0%
Israel	FITE +4.4 points	4.3%	0.0%
Netherlands	PWRD +4.3 points	0.0%	4.3%
Canada	PWRD +2.8 points	1.3%	4.1%
Taiwan	PWRD +2.7 points	0.7%	3.4%
Brazil	FITE +1.4 points	1.4%	0.0%
Sweden	PWRD +1.3 points	0.0%	1.3%

Concentration

Weight in the 10 largest Holdings

FITE23.3%
PWRD53.0%

Securities held

FITE78
PWRD29

Asset class

FITE: Equity
PWRD: Equity

Holdings

Only in FITE76
In both2
Only in PWRD27

Only in FITE

76 securities, 97.6% of FITE by weight

RAPID7 Inc2.95%
Qualys Inc2.61%
Zscaler Inc2.47%
Tenable Holdings Inc2.42%
Okta Inc2.40%
Rubrik Inc A2.33%
Sentinelone Inc Class A2.16%
N Able Inc2.11%
Crowdstrike Holdings Inc A2.01%
Sailpoint Inc1.87%
Varonis Systems Inc1.85%
Palo Alto Networks Inc1.80%
Onespan Inc1.78%
Cloudflare Inc Class A1.76%
Radware Ltd1.60%
Viasat Inc1.58%
Varex Imaging Corp1.54%
Ziff Davis Inc1.53%
Lockheed Martin Corp1.53%
Check Point Software Tech1.52%
Datadog Inc Class A1.45%
Leidos Holdings Inc1.44%
Gen Digital Inc1.43%
Embraer SA Spon Adr1.41%
Bruker Corp1.41%
Teledyne Technologies Inc1.40%
Rtx Corp1.40%
Ducommun Inc1.36%
Oceaneering Intl Inc1.32%
Blackberry Ltd1.30%
Northrop Grumman Corp1.29%
Heico Corp1.27%
Iridium Communications Inc1.26%
Fortinet Inc1.25%
Elbit Systems Ltd1.23%
Netscout Systems Inc1.22%
Osi Systems Inc1.19%
Moog Inc Class A1.18%
F5 Inc1.16%
L3HARRIS Technologies Inc1.14%
Cisco Systems Inc1.14%
Karman Holdings Inc1.13%
Lincoln Electric Holdings1.12%
Kbr Inc1.12%
Amphenol Corp Class A1.10%
Huntington Ingalls Industrie1.09%
Kopin Corp1.09%
Parsons Corp1.09%
General Dynamics Corp1.09%
Hexcel Corp1.08%

Only in PWRD

27 securities, 93.5% of PWRD by weight

General Electric8.47%
Union Pacific Corp7.02%
Venture Global Inc-Cl A6.21%
Exxonmobil Holdings Corp5.45%
Arista Networks Inc5.43%
Safran SA /Eur/4.76%
Airbus SE /Eur/4.14%
Cashusd3.94%
Eaton Corp PLC3.56%
Trane Technologies PLC3.54%
Ge Vernova Inc3.37%
Taiwan Semiconductor-Sp Adr3.29%
Quanta Services Inc3.28%
Kla Corp3.10%
Cheniere Energy Inc3.03%
Bloom Energy Corp- A2.84%
Applied Materials Inc2.53%
Vertiv Holdings Co-A2.31%
Qnity Electronics Inc2.22%
Modine Manufacturing Co2.20%
Martin Marietta Materials2.12%
Cameco Corp2.05%
First Solar Inc2.01%
Waste Connections Inc1.89%
Powell Industries Inc1.84%
Caterpillar Inc1.63%
Sandvik Ab /Sek/1.26%

Weight gaps

All 2 Holdings in both funds, largest gap first.

Holding weights in FITE and PWRD, widest gap first
Holding	More in FITEMore in PWRD	FITE	PWRD
Broadcom IncAVGO	PWRD +2.86 points	1.15%	4.01%
Mirion Technologies IncMIR	PWRD +1.35 points	1.18%	2.53%

All 78 FITE holdings⁠All 28 PWRD holdings⁠

How we measure overlap

Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.

FITE vs PWRD Cost

Overpaying PWRD vs FITE

$5,441

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

FITE 0.45%
$9,041
PWRD 0.75%
$14,482

Amount$10,000

Years30 years

Cost over time

FITE 0.45%
PWRD 0.75%
Overpaying

Year by year

Year	FITE	PWRD	Overpaying
10	$812	$1,336	$524
20	$3,128	$5,078	$1,950
30	$9,041	$14,482	$5,441

Expense ratio

0.45%FITE, cheaper
0.75%PWRD

FITE0.45%PWRD0.75%

0.18%0.90%

Middle half of Global Thematic funds
Median 0.58%

FITE 3rd cheapest of 18 funds

PWRD 14th cheapest of 18 funds

FITE vs PWRD Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026

Yield (12M): FITE 0.11%, better; PWRD 0.06%
Payout (12M): FITE $0.12; PWRD $0.06
Last payment: FITE $0.04; PWRD $0.06
Ex-dividend: FITE Sep 21, 2026; PWRD Jun 23, 2026
Paid on: FITE Sep 23, 2026; PWRD Jun 25, 2026
Frequency: FITE Quarterly; PWRD Annual

Distribution history

Per share, 2018 to 2026, same scale for both

FITEQuarterly · 33 paymentsAll FITE payments⁠

PWRDAnnual · 15 paymentsAll PWRD payments⁠

FITE vs PWRD Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years: FITE 21.9%, betterPWRD 22.5%
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years: FITE 1.26, betterPWRD 0.91
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years: FITE −27.1%PWRD −25.9%since Feb 2022
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years: FITE 1.32PWRD 1.19; Market = 1

Popular comparisons

FITEAvsAGNGA
State Street SPDR S&P Kensho Future Security ETF · Global X Aging Population ETF
Expense ratio
0.45% · 0.50%
Category
PWRDCvsAGNGA
TCW Transform Systems ETF · Global X Aging Population ETF
Expense ratio
0.75% · 0.50%
Category
FITEAvsWRNDB
State Street SPDR S&P Kensho Future Security ETF · NYLI Global Equity R&D Leaders ETF
Expense ratio
0.45% · 0.18%
Category
PWRDCvsWRNDB
TCW Transform Systems ETF · NYLI Global Equity R&D Leaders ETF
Expense ratio
0.75% · 0.18%
Category
FITEAvsICOPB
State Street SPDR S&P Kensho Future Security ETF · iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF
Expense ratio
0.45% · 0.47%
Category
PWRDCvsICOPB
TCW Transform Systems ETF · iShares Copper and Metals Mining ETF
Expense ratio
0.75% · 0.47%
Category