PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BFOR vs. BMVP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BFOR vs. BMVP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) and Invesco Bloomberg MVP Multi-factor ETF (BMVP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BFOR achieves a 16.49% return, which is significantly higher than BMVP's 10.69% return. Over the past 10 years, BFOR has outperformed BMVP with an annualized return of 12.56%, while BMVP has yielded a comparatively lower 9.55% annualized return.


BFOR

1D
1.26%
1M
0.64%
6M
11.32%
YTD
16.49%
1Y
25.45%
3Y*
18.22%
5Y*
10.97%
10Y*
12.56%
ALL TIME*
11.64%

BMVP

1D
0.27%
1M
3.19%
6M
5.07%
YTD
10.69%
1Y
14.63%
3Y*
13.34%
5Y*
7.35%
10Y*
9.55%
ALL TIME*
2.96%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$723.94K$634.98K$457.05K
$45.96K$66.92K$59.96K

BFOR vs. BMVP - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
BFOR
ALPS Barron's 400 ETF
16.49%13.85%17.81%18.19%-15.92%30.71%17.60%21.30%-13.86%19.37%
BMVP
Invesco Bloomberg MVP Multi-factor ETF
10.69%6.15%17.46%19.03%-16.01%19.38%8.52%13.47%-6.40%20.16%

Correlation

The correlation between BFOR and BMVP is 0.62, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.62

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.77

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.85

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2013

0.86

Over the past year, the correlation between BFOR and BMVP has dropped to 0.62 - well below their long-term average of 0.86, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

BFOR vs. BMVP - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BFOR
BMVP

Financial Services

21.8%
16.9%

Technology

20.9%
16.4%

Industrials

16.4%
17.3%

Healthcare

11.9%
9.8%

Consumer Cyclical

10.9%
11.1%

Energy

6.4%
4.9%

Consumer Defensive

4.0%
4.8%

Communication Services

3.5%
6.6%

Basic Materials

2.4%
1.5%

Utilities

1.8%
5.4%

Real Estate

-

5.4%

Financial Services

BFOR
21.8%
BMVP
16.9%

Technology

BFOR
20.9%
BMVP
16.4%

Industrials

BFOR
16.4%
BMVP
17.3%

Healthcare

BFOR
11.9%
BMVP
9.8%

Consumer Cyclical

BFOR
10.9%
BMVP
11.1%

Energy

BFOR
6.4%
BMVP
4.9%

Consumer Defensive

BFOR
4.0%
BMVP
4.8%

Communication Services

BFOR
3.5%
BMVP
6.6%

Basic Materials

BFOR
2.4%
BMVP
1.5%

Utilities

BFOR
1.8%
BMVP
5.4%

Real Estate

BFOR

-

BMVP
5.4%

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

BFOR vs. BMVP — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

BFOR
BFOR Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
BFOR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BFOR Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
BFOR Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
BFOR Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
BFOR Martin Ratio Rank: 7777
Martin Ratio Rank

BMVP
BMVP Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
BMVP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BMVP Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
BMVP Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
BMVP Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
BMVP Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

BFOR vs. BMVP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) and Invesco Bloomberg MVP Multi-factor ETF (BMVP). 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.


BFORBMVPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.25

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.26

+0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.85

2.28

+0.57

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.38

6.81

+3.57

BFOR vs. BMVP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BFOR Sharpe Ratio is 1.73, which is comparable to the BMVP Sharpe Ratio of 1.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BFOR and BMVP, 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...

Drawdowns

BFOR vs. BMVP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BFOR drawdown since its inception was -41.27%, smaller than the maximum BMVP drawdown of -78.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFOR and BMVP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BFORBMVPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.27%

-78.13%

+36.86%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.98%

-6.45%

-2.53%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.91%

-15.12%

-6.79%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.93%

-26.58%

+0.65%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.27%

-39.45%

-1.82%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-1.29%

+1.29%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.36%

-35.96%

+29.60%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.46%

2.15%

+0.31%

Volatility

BFOR vs. BMVP - Volatility Comparison

ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) and Invesco Bloomberg MVP Multi-factor ETF (BMVP) have volatilities of 3.31% and 3.26%, 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


BFORBMVPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.31%

3.26%

+0.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.68%

7.29%

+3.39%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.82%

9.97%

+4.85%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.41%

15.90%

+3.51%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.35%

18.74%

+1.61%

BFOR vs. BMVP - Expense Ratio Comparison

BFOR has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than BMVP's 0.29% expense ratio.


Dividends

BFOR vs. BMVP - Dividend Comparison

BFOR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.51%, less than BMVP's 1.71% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BFOR
ALPS Barron's 400 ETF
0.51%0.60%0.69%1.26%1.68%0.92%0.98%0.69%0.94%0.60%0.78%0.86%
BMVP
Invesco Bloomberg MVP Multi-factor ETF
1.71%1.77%1.58%1.67%1.51%0.56%1.09%0.95%1.44%1.75%1.35%1.02%

Frequently Asked Questions


BFOR and BMVP have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BFOR has higher volatility (3.31%) compared to BMVP (3.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFOR dropped -41.27% vs BMVP's -78.13%.

On 10-year performance, BFOR leads with 12.56% vs 9.55% for BMVP. On fees, BMVP is cheaper at 0.29% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, BFOR has performed better with a 12.56% return vs 9.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BMVP is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for BFOR.

BMVP has the higher dividend yield at 1.71%, compared with 0.51% for BFOR.

BFOR tracks Barron's 400 Index, while BMVP tracks Bloomberg MVP Index. They also come from different issuers: SS&C and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for BFOR and 0.29% for BMVP.

BFOR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 vs 1.48), 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 BFOR and BMVP

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