PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BBMC vs. RZG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BBMC vs. RZG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Mid Cap Equity ETF (BBMC) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BBMC achieves a 16.66% return, which is significantly lower than RZG's 18.15% return.


BBMC

1D
-0.12%
1M
4.96%
YTD
16.66%
6M
16.84%
1Y
33.04%
3Y*
19.56%
5Y*
8.32%
10Y*

RZG

1D
-0.14%
1M
-0.10%
YTD
18.15%
6M
16.98%
1Y
30.70%
3Y*
17.12%
5Y*
4.85%
10Y*
9.65%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BBMC vs. RZG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
BBMC
JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Mid Cap Equity ETF
16.66%12.24%15.15%18.37%-19.77%17.64%61.98%
RZG
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF
18.15%10.22%9.84%19.15%-29.00%21.01%77.75%

Correlation

The correlation between BBMC and RZG is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.88

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.92

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.93

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2020

0.93

The correlation between BBMC and RZG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

BBMC vs. RZG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BBMC
RZG

Technology

21.6%
16.8%

Industrials

18.6%
18.2%

Consumer Cyclical

11.5%
8.8%

Financial Services

10.6%
15.0%

Healthcare

10.0%
22.0%

Real Estate

6.3%
7.6%

Basic Materials

4.9%
0.4%

Consumer Defensive

3.5%
5.9%

Energy

3.1%
3.0%

Utilities

2.6%
0.4%

Communication Services

2.4%
1.9%

Technology

BBMC
21.6%
RZG
16.8%

Industrials

BBMC
18.6%
RZG
18.2%

Consumer Cyclical

BBMC
11.5%
RZG
8.8%

Financial Services

BBMC
10.6%
RZG
15.0%

Healthcare

BBMC
10.0%
RZG
22.0%

Real Estate

BBMC
6.3%
RZG
7.6%

Basic Materials

BBMC
4.9%
RZG
0.4%

Consumer Defensive

BBMC
3.5%
RZG
5.9%

Energy

BBMC
3.1%
RZG
3.0%

Utilities

BBMC
2.6%
RZG
0.4%

Communication Services

BBMC
2.4%
RZG
1.9%

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

BBMC vs. RZG — Risk / Return Rank

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

BBMC
BBMC Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
BBMC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BBMC Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
BBMC Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
BBMC Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
BBMC Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank

RZG
RZG Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
RZG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RZG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
RZG Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
RZG Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
RZG Martin Ratio Rank: 6565
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.

BBMC vs. RZG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Mid Cap Equity ETF (BBMC) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG). 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.


BBMCRZGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.37

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.38

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.29

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.41

3.58

-0.17

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.41

11.94

+1.47

BBMC vs. RZG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BBMC Sharpe Ratio is 2.04, which is comparable to the RZG Sharpe Ratio of 1.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BBMC and RZG, 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


BBMCRZGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.04

1.66

+0.37

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.41

0.21

+0.19

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.39

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.85

0.37

+0.47

Drawdowns

BBMC vs. RZG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BBMC drawdown since its inception was -30.11%, smaller than the maximum RZG drawdown of -58.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BBMC and RZG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BBMCRZGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-30.11%

-58.52%

+28.41%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.75%

-8.63%

-1.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.18%

-25.73%

+1.55%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-30.11%

-38.33%

+8.22%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-54.02%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.12%

-1.92%

+1.80%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.92%

-12.13%

+3.21%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.47%

2.58%

-0.11%

Volatility

BBMC vs. RZG - Volatility Comparison

JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Mid Cap Equity ETF (BBMC) and Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF (RZG) have volatilities of 4.72% and 4.68%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BBMCRZGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.72%

4.68%

+0.04%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.14%

13.57%

-1.43%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.32%

18.57%

-2.25%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.59%

22.97%

-2.38%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.08%

24.64%

-3.56%

BBMC vs. RZG - Expense Ratio Comparison

BBMC has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than RZG's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

BBMC vs. RZG - Dividend Comparison

BBMC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.09%, more than RZG's 0.42% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BBMC
JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Mid Cap Equity ETF
1.09%1.25%1.31%1.36%1.48%0.87%0.69%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
RZG
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600® Pure Growth ETF
0.42%0.37%0.95%1.43%1.59%0.22%0.49%0.70%0.46%0.44%0.65%0.70%

Frequently Asked Questions


BBMC and RZG have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BBMC has higher volatility (4.72%) compared to RZG (4.68%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BBMC dropped -30.11% vs RZG's -58.52%.

On 5-year performance, BBMC leads with 8.32% vs 4.85% for RZG. On fees, BBMC is cheaper at 0.07% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, BBMC has performed better with a 8.32% return vs 4.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BBMC is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RZG.

BBMC has the higher dividend yield at 1.09%, compared with 0.42% for RZG.

BBMC tracks Morningstar US Mid Cap Target Market Exposure Extended Index, while RZG tracks S&P Small Cap 600 Pure Growth. They also come from different issuers: JPMorgan and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for BBMC and 0.35% for RZG.

BBMC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 vs 1.66), 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 BBMC and RZG

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