BFOR vs. CTEF

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BFOR (ALPS Barron's 400 ETF) and CTEF (Castellan Targeted Equity ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. BFOR is passively managed, while CTEF is actively managed. Over the past year, BFOR returned 24.60% vs 81.04% for CTEF. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BFOR charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for CTEF.

Performance

BFOR vs. CTEF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) and Castellan Targeted Equity ETF (CTEF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BFOR achieves a 12.73% return, which is significantly lower than CTEF's 36.91% return.

BFOR

• 1D: -0.71%
• 1M: 3.66%
• YTD: 12.73%
• 6M: 10.60%
• 1Y: 24.60%
• 3Y*: 20.01%
• 5Y*: 10.60%
• 10Y*: 13.11%

CTEF

• 1D: -2.45%
• 1M: 13.53%
• YTD: 36.91%
• 6M: 33.85%
• 1Y: 81.04%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BFOR vs. CTEF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BFOR ALPS Barron's 400 ETF	12.73%	11.70%
CTEF Castellan Targeted Equity ETF	36.91%	33.10%

Correlation

The correlation between BFOR and CTEF is 0.78, 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	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 18, 2025	0.78

The correlation between BFOR and CTEF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BFOR vs. CTEF — Risk / Return Rank

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

BFOR

BFOR Risk / Return Rank: 55
BFOR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
BFOR Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
BFOR Omega Ratio Rank: 48
BFOR Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
BFOR Martin Ratio Rank: 60

CTEF

CTEF Risk / Return Rank: 93
CTEF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
CTEF Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
CTEF Omega Ratio Rank: 92
CTEF Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
CTEF Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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. CTEF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) and Castellan Targeted Equity ETF (CTEF). 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.

	BFOR	CTEF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.65	3.60	-1.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.43	4.48	-2.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.57	-0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.75	5.43	-2.68
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.06	25.12	-15.06

BFOR vs. CTEF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BFOR Sharpe Ratio is 1.65, which is lower than the CTEF Sharpe Ratio of 3.60. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BFOR and CTEF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BFOR vs. CTEF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BFOR drawdown since its inception was -41.27%, which is greater than CTEF's maximum drawdown of -15.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFOR and CTEF.

Drawdown Indicators

	BFOR	CTEF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.27%	-15.00%	-26.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.98%	-15.00%	+6.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.91%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.93%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.27%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.71%	-2.45%	+1.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.40%	-1.75%	-4.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.45%	3.24%	-0.79%

Volatility

BFOR vs. CTEF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) is 4.11%, while Castellan Targeted Equity ETF (CTEF) has a volatility of 9.15%. This indicates that BFOR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CTEF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BFOR	CTEF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.11%	9.15%	-5.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.97%	19.03%	-8.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.03%	22.64%	-7.61%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.46%	22.56%	-3.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.40%	22.56%	-2.16%

BFOR vs. CTEF - Expense Ratio Comparison

BFOR has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than CTEF's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

BFOR vs. CTEF - Dividend Comparison

BFOR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%, more than CTEF's 0.06% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BFOR ALPS Barron's 400 ETF	0.53%	0.60%	0.69%	1.26%	1.68%	0.92%	0.98%	0.69%	0.94%	0.60%	0.78%	0.86%
CTEF Castellan Targeted Equity ETF	0.06%	0.08%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BFOR and CTEF in my portfolio?

BFOR and CTEF have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BFOR or CTEF?

CTEF has higher volatility (9.15%) compared to BFOR (4.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFOR dropped -41.27% vs CTEF's -15.00%.

Which ETF is better, BFOR or CTEF?

On 1-year performance, CTEF leads with 81.04% vs 24.60% for BFOR. On fees, CTEF is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, BFOR has been the lower-risk option at 4.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BFOR or CTEF?

Over the 1-year period, CTEF has performed better with a 81.04% return vs 24.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BFOR or CTEF?

CTEF is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for BFOR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BFOR or CTEF?

BFOR has the higher dividend yield at 0.53%, compared with 0.06% for CTEF.

What is the main difference between BFOR and CTEF?

They also come from different issuers: SS&C and Castellan. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for BFOR and 0.45% for CTEF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CTEF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.60 vs 1.65), 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.