BBHM vs. IMCG

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about BBH Select Mid Cap ETF (BBHM) and iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG).

BBHM and IMCG are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. BBHM is a passively managed fund by BBH that tracks the performance of the Actively Managed. It was launched on May 24, 2021. IMCG is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Morningstar US Mid Cap Broad Growth Index. It was launched on Jun 28, 2004. Both BBHM and IMCG are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

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.

BBHM vs. IMCG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BBHM BBH Select Mid Cap ETF	-1.59%	2.74%
IMCG iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF	0.54%	1.80%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BBHM achieves a -1.59% return, which is significantly lower than IMCG's 0.54% return.

BBHM

• 1D: 0.73%
• 1M: -6.26%
• YTD: -1.59%
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IMCG

• 1D: 0.49%
• 1M: -3.35%
• YTD: 0.54%
• 6M: -3.04%
• 1Y: 10.93%
• 3Y*: 12.73%
• 5Y*: 5.45%
• 10Y*: 12.79%

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

BBHM vs. IMCG - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

BBHM

BBH Select Mid Cap ETF

IMCG

iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF

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: 29
IMCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
IMCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
IMCG Omega Ratio Rank: 27
IMCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
IMCG Martin Ratio Rank: 35

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	—	0.54	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.27	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.63	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.17	0.50	-0.33

Correlation

The correlation between BBHM and IMCG is 0.89, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

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 0.78%.

	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	0.78%	0.78%	0.78%	0.85%	0.91%	0.41%	0.09%	0.30%	0.35%	0.45%	0.52%	0.38%

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 (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-35.08%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.08%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.49%	-5.27%	-1.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.38%	-9.29%	+6.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	3.18%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BBHM	IMCG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	7.16%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	12.15%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.60%	20.30%	-1.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.60%	20.08%	-1.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.60%	20.44%	-1.84%