BBHM vs. IMCG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BBHM (BBH Select Mid Cap ETF) and IMCG (iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds - BBHM tracks the Actively Managed while IMCG tracks the Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Growth Index. Both are passively managed. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BBHM charges 0.81%/yr vs 0.06%/yr for IMCG.

Performance

BBHM vs. IMCG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in BBH Select Mid Cap ETF (BBHM) and iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BBHM achieves a 1.78% return, which is significantly lower than IMCG's 20.05% return.

BBHM

• 1D: -0.35%
• 1M: -1.65%
• YTD: 1.78%
• 6M: -0.32%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IMCG

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: 8.33%
• YTD: 20.05%
• 6M: 18.28%
• 1Y: 23.35%
• 3Y*: 18.91%
• 5Y*: 8.62%
• 10Y*: 14.46%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BBHM vs. IMCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BBHM BBH Select Mid Cap ETF	1.78%	2.74%
IMCG iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF	20.05%	1.80%

Correlation

The correlation between BBHM and IMCG is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 18, 2025	0.82

Return for Risk

BBHM vs. IMCG — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMCG

IMCG Risk / Return Rank: 44
IMCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
IMCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
IMCG Omega Ratio Rank: 40
IMCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
IMCG Martin Ratio Rank: 52

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.

BBHM vs. IMCG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BBH Select Mid Cap ETF (BBHM) and iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BBHM	IMCG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	1.51	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.43	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.71	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.50	0.54	-0.04

Drawdowns

BBHM vs. IMCG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BBHM drawdown since its inception was -9.78%, smaller than the maximum IMCG drawdown of -58.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BBHM and IMCG.

Drawdown Indicators

	BBHM	IMCG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.78%	-58.96%	+49.18%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-10.17%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-21.92%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.08%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.08%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.28%	-0.26%	-5.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.71%	-9.22%	+6.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	2.61%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BBHM	IMCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	4.65%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	12.53%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.46%	15.53%	+1.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.46%	20.17%	-2.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.46%	20.51%	-3.05%

BBHM vs. IMCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

BBHM has a 0.81% expense ratio, which is higher than IMCG's 0.06% expense ratio.

Dividends

BBHM vs. IMCG - Dividend Comparison

BBHM has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IMCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.65%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BBHM BBH Select Mid Cap ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IMCG iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF	0.65%	0.78%	0.78%	0.85%	0.91%	0.41%	0.09%	0.30%	0.35%	0.45%	0.52%	0.38%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BBHM and IMCG in my portfolio?

BBHM and IMCG have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BBHM or IMCG?

On fees, IMCG is cheaper at 0.06% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BBHM or IMCG?

IMCG is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.81% for BBHM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BBHM or IMCG?

IMCG has the higher dividend yield at 0.65%, compared with 0.00% for BBHM.

What is the main difference between BBHM and IMCG?

BBHM tracks Actively Managed, while IMCG tracks Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: BBH and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.81% for BBHM and 0.06% for IMCG.