BCFN vs. LSEQ
BCFN (Baron Financials ETF) and LSEQ (Harbor Long-Short Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BCFN is a Financials Equities fund tracking the Actively Managed, while LSEQ is a Long-Short fund actively managed by Harbor. BCFN is passively managed, while LSEQ is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.09, they often move in opposite directions. BCFN charges 0.80%/yr vs 1.70%/yr for LSEQ.
Performance
BCFN vs. LSEQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BCFN achieves a -14.51% return, which is significantly lower than LSEQ's 30.59% return.
BCFN
- 1D
- -0.18%
- 1M
- 0.68%
- YTD
- -14.51%
- 6M
- -15.75%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LSEQ
- 1D
- 1.94%
- 1M
- 6.43%
- YTD
- 30.59%
- 6M
- 29.19%
- 1Y
- 33.14%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BCFN vs. LSEQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BCFN Baron Financials ETF | -14.51% | -0.45% |
LSEQ Harbor Long-Short Equity ETF | 30.59% | -0.50% |
Correlation
The correlation between BCFN and LSEQ is -0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2025 | -0.09 |
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
BCFN vs. LSEQ — Risk / Return Rank
BCFN
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
LSEQ
BCFN vs. LSEQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Baron Financials ETF (BCFN) and Harbor Long-Short Equity ETF (LSEQ). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| BCFN | LSEQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.39 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 4.50 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 14.14 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BCFN vs. LSEQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BCFN drawdown since its inception was -20.95%, which is greater than LSEQ's maximum drawdown of -8.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCFN and LSEQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BCFN | LSEQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -20.95% | -8.35% | -12.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -7.40% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -16.64% | 0.00% | -16.64% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.57% | -3.20% | -9.37% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.35% | — |
Volatility
BCFN vs. LSEQ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BCFN | LSEQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 5.19% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 13.24% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 19.05% | 15.46% | +3.59% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.05% | 14.44% | +4.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.05% | 14.44% | +4.61% |
BCFN vs. LSEQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
BCFN has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is lower than LSEQ's 1.70% expense ratio.
Dividends
BCFN vs. LSEQ - Dividend Comparison
BCFN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LSEQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.69%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
BCFN Baron Financials ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LSEQ Harbor Long-Short Equity ETF | 1.69% | 2.20% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BCFN and LSEQ have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BCFN is cheaper at 0.80% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BCFN is cheaper with a 0.80% expense ratio, compared with 1.70% for LSEQ.
LSEQ has the higher dividend yield at 1.69%, compared with 0.00% for BCFN.
BCFN is categorized as Financials Equities, while LSEQ is Long-Short. They also come from different issuers: Baron Capital and Harbor. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for BCFN and 1.70% for LSEQ.
Find the right allocation for BCFN and LSEQ
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