PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
AAVM vs. BOXA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

AAVM vs. BOXA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF (AAVM) and Alpha Architect Aggregate Bond ETF (BOXA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AAVM achieves a 17.28% return, which is significantly higher than BOXA's -0.19% return.


AAVM

1D
-0.37%
1M
3.80%
YTD
17.28%
6M
20.07%
1Y
34.59%
3Y*
19.57%
5Y*
6.94%
10Y*

BOXA

1D
-0.22%
1M
0.13%
YTD
-0.19%
6M
-0.46%
1Y
3.52%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AAVM vs. BOXA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
AAVM
Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF
17.28%18.54%1.05%
BOXA
Alpha Architect Aggregate Bond ETF
-0.19%5.41%0.02%

Correlation

The correlation between AAVM and BOXA is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.31

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2024

0.26

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

AAVM vs. BOXA — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AAVM
AAVM Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
AAVM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AAVM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
AAVM Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
AAVM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
AAVM Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

BOXA
BOXA Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
BOXA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2626
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BOXA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
BOXA Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
BOXA Calmar Ratio Rank: 2323
Calmar Ratio Rank
BOXA Martin Ratio Rank: 2525
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AAVM vs. BOXA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF (AAVM) and Alpha Architect Aggregate Bond ETF (BOXA). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


AAVMBOXADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.82

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.16

+0.26

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.20

1.10

+2.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.42

3.36

+10.06

AAVM vs. BOXA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AAVM Sharpe Ratio is 2.28, which is higher than the BOXA Sharpe Ratio of 0.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AAVM and BOXA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


AAVMBOXADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.28

0.94

+1.34

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.44

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.35

0.87

-0.52

Drawdowns

AAVM vs. BOXA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AAVM drawdown since its inception was -34.71%, which is greater than BOXA's maximum drawdown of -3.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AAVM and BOXA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


AAVMBOXADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.71%

-3.22%

-31.49%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.85%

-3.22%

-7.63%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.23%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.73%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.55%

-2.04%

+1.49%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-13.32%

-0.75%

-12.57%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.58%

1.05%

+1.53%

Volatility

AAVM vs. BOXA - Volatility Comparison

Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF (AAVM) has a higher volatility of 5.00% compared to Alpha Architect Aggregate Bond ETF (BOXA) at 1.36%. This indicates that AAVM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BOXA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


AAVMBOXADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.00%

1.36%

+3.64%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.87%

2.62%

+10.25%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.26%

3.75%

+11.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.68%

4.15%

+11.53%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.90%

4.15%

+10.75%

AAVM vs. BOXA - Expense Ratio Comparison

AAVM has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than BOXA's 0.23% expense ratio.


Dividends

AAVM vs. BOXA - Dividend Comparison

AAVM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.75%, more than BOXA's 0.13% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
AAVM
Alpha Architect Global Factor Equity ETF
1.75%2.05%2.54%4.13%2.24%0.82%0.00%1.76%0.93%0.81%
BOXA
Alpha Architect Aggregate Bond ETF
0.13%0.13%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


AAVM and BOXA have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

AAVM has higher volatility (5.00%) compared to BOXA (1.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AAVM dropped -34.71% vs BOXA's -3.22%.

On 1-year performance, AAVM leads with 34.59% vs 3.52% for BOXA. On fees, BOXA is cheaper at 0.23% per year. On volatility, BOXA has been the lower-risk option at 1.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, AAVM has performed better with a 34.59% return vs 3.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BOXA is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for AAVM.

AAVM has the higher dividend yield at 1.75%, compared with 0.13% for BOXA.

AAVM is categorized as Multi-factor, while BOXA is Intermediate Core Bond. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for AAVM and 0.23% for BOXA.

AAVM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.28 vs 0.94), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for AAVM and BOXA

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer