BFC vs. BMI
BFC (Bank First Corporation) and BMI (Badger Meter, Inc.) are both stocks. BFC operates in Banks - Regional (Financial Services), while BMI operates in Electrical Equipment & Parts (Industrials). Over the past 10 years, BFC returned 20.10%/yr vs 15.68%/yr for BMI. Their 0.12 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship.
Performance
BFC vs. BMI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BFC achieves a 26.33% return, which is significantly higher than BMI's -22.51% return. Over the past 10 years, BFC has outperformed BMI with an annualized return of 20.10%, while BMI has yielded a comparatively lower 15.68% annualized return.
BFC
- 1D
- 0.96%
- 1M
- 0.62%
- 6M
- 10.29%
- YTD
- 26.33%
- 1Y
- 32.29%
- 3Y*
- 23.04%
- 5Y*
- 19.43%
- 10Y*
- 20.10%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.81%
BMI
- 1D
- 3.04%
- 1M
- -8.12%
- 6M
- -7.80%
- YTD
- -22.51%
- 1Y
- -28.08%
- 3Y*
- -5.44%
- 5Y*
- 6.70%
- 10Y*
- 15.68%
- ALL TIME*
- 16.22%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $15.81M | $14.95M | $14.54M | |
| $96.39M | $73.48M | $68.10M |
BFC vs. BMI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BFC Bank First Corporation | 26.33% | 28.68% | 16.37% | -5.32% | 30.02% | 13.29% | -6.17% | 52.07% | 5.71% | 36.37% |
BMI Badger Meter, Inc. | -22.51% | -17.15% | 38.28% | 42.58% | 3.23% | 14.11% | 46.37% | 33.46% | 4.09% | 30.91% |
Correlation
The correlation between BFC and BMI is 0.27, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.27 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.35 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.37 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.28 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2002 | 0.12 |
The correlation between BFC and BMI shifts across timeframes, from 0.12 (all time) to 0.37 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
Fundamentals
BFC:
$1.71B
BMI:
$3.89B
BFC:
$7.71
BMI:
$4.27
BFC:
19.80
BMI:
31.43
BFC:
3.14
BMI:
1.31
BFC:
5.51
BMI:
4.48
BFC:
2.08
BMI:
4.84
BFC:
$291.54M
BMI:
$880.96M
BFC:
$216.14M
BMI:
$363.92M
BFC:
$107.67M
BMI:
$188.13M
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
BFC vs. BMI — Risk / Return Rank
BFC
BMI
BFC vs. BMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bank First Corporation (BFC) and Badger Meter, Inc. (BMI). 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.
| BFC | BMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.77 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.30 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.21 | 0.91 | +0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.16 | -0.69 | +2.85 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.98 | -1.36 | +6.34 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BFC vs. BMI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BFC drawdown since its inception was -82.02%, which is greater than BMI's maximum drawdown of -68.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFC and BMI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BFC | BMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -82.02% | -68.22% | -13.80% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.17% | -40.85% | +26.68% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.70% | -55.06% | +39.36% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -32.75% | -55.06% | +22.31% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.78% | -55.06% | +15.28% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.31% | -46.59% | +46.28% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -27.03% | -19.10% | -7.93% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.13% | 20.69% | -14.56% |
Volatility
BFC vs. BMI - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Bank First Corporation (BFC) is 7.88%, while Badger Meter, Inc. (BMI) has a volatility of 17.92%. This indicates that BFC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BMI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BFC | BMI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.88% | 17.92% | -10.04% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.44% | 40.24% | -23.80% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.81% | 45.09% | -18.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 27.42% | 34.82% | -7.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 30.36% | 34.15% | -3.79% |
Dividends
BFC vs. BMI - Dividend Comparison
BFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.28%, more than BMI's 1.19% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BFC Bank First Corporation | 1.28% | 4.35% | 1.56% | 1.33% | 1.01% | 1.58% | 1.25% | 1.14% | 1.46% | 1.43% | 1.77% | 2.23% |
BMI Badger Meter, Inc. | 1.19% | 0.85% | 0.58% | 0.64% | 0.78% | 0.71% | 0.74% | 0.99% | 1.14% | 1.03% | 1.16% | 1.33% |
Financials
BFC vs. BMI - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between Bank First Corporation and Badger Meter, Inc.. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.
Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities
BFC vs. BMI - Profitability Comparison
BFC - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, Bank First Corporation reported a gross profit of 65.06M and revenue of 85.75M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 75.9%.
BMI - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, Badger Meter, Inc. reported a gross profit of 90.77M and revenue of 222.32M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 40.8%.
BFC - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, Bank First Corporation reported an operating income of 30.64M and revenue of 85.75M, resulting in an operating margin of 35.7%.
BMI - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, Badger Meter, Inc. reported an operating income of 39.38M and revenue of 222.32M, resulting in an operating margin of 17.7%.
BFC - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, Bank First Corporation reported a net income of 24.69M and revenue of 85.75M, resulting in a net margin of 28.8%.
BMI - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Aug 2026, Badger Meter, Inc. reported a net income of 29.72M and revenue of 222.32M, resulting in a net margin of 13.4%.
Frequently Asked Questions
BFC and BMI have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BMI has higher volatility (17.92%) compared to BFC (7.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFC dropped -82.02% vs BMI's -68.22%.
BFC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.14 vs -0.62), 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.
Find the right allocation for BFC and BMI
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