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 9.89% return, which is significantly higher than BMVP's 5.85% return. Over the past 10 years, BFOR has outperformed BMVP with an annualized return of 12.37%, while BMVP has yielded a comparatively lower 9.52% annualized return.


BFOR

1D
-0.49%
1M
2.26%
YTD
9.89%
6M
10.61%
1Y
22.04%
3Y*
19.35%
5Y*
9.98%
10Y*
12.37%

BMVP

1D
-0.13%
1M
0.31%
YTD
5.85%
6M
6.04%
1Y
8.50%
3Y*
13.71%
5Y*
6.10%
10Y*
9.52%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BFOR vs. BMVP - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
BFOR
ALPS Barron's 400 ETF
9.89%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
5.85%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 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


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

0.70

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

0.80

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

0.87

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.86

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2013

0.86

The correlation between BFOR and BMVP shifts across timeframes, from 0.70 (1 year) to 0.87 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BFOR vs. BMVP - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BFOR
BMVP

Financial Services

21.3%
16.4%

Technology

18.8%
16.4%

Industrials

16.7%
16.8%

Healthcare

12.0%
9.7%

Consumer Cyclical

11.1%
10.6%

Energy

7.8%
5.2%

Consumer Defensive

4.2%
5.1%

Communication Services

3.6%
7.6%

Basic Materials

2.8%
1.6%

Utilities

1.9%
5.1%

Real Estate

-

5.5%

Financial Services

BFOR
21.3%
BMVP
16.4%

Technology

BFOR
18.8%
BMVP
16.4%

Industrials

BFOR
16.7%
BMVP
16.8%

Healthcare

BFOR
12.0%
BMVP
9.7%

Consumer Cyclical

BFOR
11.1%
BMVP
10.6%

Energy

BFOR
7.8%
BMVP
5.2%

Consumer Defensive

BFOR
4.2%
BMVP
5.1%

Communication Services

BFOR
3.6%
BMVP
7.6%

Basic Materials

BFOR
2.8%
BMVP
1.6%

Utilities

BFOR
1.9%
BMVP
5.1%

Real Estate

BFOR

-

BMVP
5.5%

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

BFOR
BFOR Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
BFOR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BFOR Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
BFOR Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
BFOR Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
BFOR Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
Martin Ratio Rank

BMVP
BMVP Risk / Return Rank: 2525
Overall Rank
BMVP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BMVP Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
BMVP Omega Ratio Rank: 2222
Omega Ratio Rank
BMVP Calmar Ratio Rank: 2828
Calmar Ratio Rank
BMVP Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
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.

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.


BFORBMVPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.62

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.90

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.15

+0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.46

1.32

+1.14

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.02

4.06

+4.96

BFOR vs. BMVP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BFOR Sharpe Ratio is 1.50, which is higher than the BMVP Sharpe Ratio of 0.88. 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BFORBMVPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.50

0.88

+0.62

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.52

0.38

+0.14

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

0.51

+0.10

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.59

0.11

+0.48

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

-0.49%

-2.37%

+1.88%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.43%

-36.21%

+29.78%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.45%

2.10%

+0.35%

Volatility

BFOR vs. BMVP - Volatility Comparison

ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) has a higher volatility of 3.52% compared to Invesco Bloomberg MVP Multi-factor ETF (BMVP) at 2.14%. This indicates that BFOR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BMVP based on this measure. 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

3.52%

2.14%

+1.38%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.64%

7.19%

+3.45%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.80%

9.75%

+5.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.41%

16.07%

+3.34%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.41%

18.81%

+1.60%

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 0.54%, less than BMVP's 1.68% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BFOR
ALPS Barron's 400 ETF
0.54%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
1.68%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 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BFOR has higher volatility (3.52%) compared to BMVP (2.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFOR dropped -41.27% vs BMVP's -78.13%.

On 10-year performance, BFOR leads with 12.37% vs 9.52% for BMVP. On fees, BMVP is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, BMVP has been the lower-risk option at 2.14%. 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 12.37% return vs 9.52%. 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 1.68%, compared with 0.54% 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 (1.50 vs 0.88), 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