BFOR vs. ETHO
BFOR (ALPS Barron's 400 ETF) and ETHO (Amplify Etho Climate Leadership U.S. ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds - BFOR tracks the Barron's 400 Index while ETHO tracks the Etho Climate Leadership Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, BFOR returned 22.45% vs 37.11% for ETHO. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BFOR charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for ETHO.
Performance
BFOR vs. ETHO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BFOR achieves a 14.46% return, which is significantly lower than ETHO's 22.44% return.
BFOR
- 1D
- 0.37%
- 1M
- 1.67%
- 6M
- 9.00%
- YTD
- 14.46%
- 1Y
- 22.45%
- 3Y*
- 17.95%
- 5Y*
- 11.33%
- 10Y*
- 12.49%
ETHO
- 1D
- 0.49%
- 1M
- 3.24%
- 6M
- 16.53%
- YTD
- 22.44%
- 1Y
- 37.11%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BFOR vs. ETHO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
BFOR ALPS Barron's 400 ETF | 14.46% | 13.85% | 17.74% |
ETHO Amplify Etho Climate Leadership U.S. ETF | 22.44% | 10.23% | 11.21% |
Correlation
The correlation between BFOR and ETHO is 0.95, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 29, 2024 | 0.94 |
The correlation between BFOR and ETHO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.
BFOR vs. ETHO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BFOR
ETHO
Financial Services
Technology
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Communication Services
Basic Materials
Utilities
Real Estate
-
Financial Services
BFOR
ETHO
Technology
BFOR
ETHO
Industrials
BFOR
ETHO
Healthcare
BFOR
ETHO
Consumer Cyclical
BFOR
ETHO
Energy
BFOR
ETHO
Consumer Defensive
BFOR
ETHO
Communication Services
BFOR
ETHO
Basic Materials
BFOR
ETHO
Utilities
BFOR
ETHO
Real Estate
BFOR
-
ETHO
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. ETHO — Risk / Return Rank
BFOR
ETHO
BFOR vs. ETHO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) and Amplify Etho Climate Leadership U.S. ETF (ETHO). 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 | ETHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.58 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.68 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.36 | -0.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.51 | 4.03 | -1.52 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.18 | 15.62 | -6.43 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BFOR vs. ETHO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BFOR drawdown since its inception was -41.27%, which is greater than ETHO's maximum drawdown of -25.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFOR and ETHO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BFOR | ETHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -41.27% | -25.50% | -15.77% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.98% | -9.25% | +0.27% |
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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.42% | -0.82% | -0.60% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.37% | -4.34% | -2.03% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.45% | 2.38% | +0.07% |
Volatility
BFOR vs. ETHO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) is 3.16%, while Amplify Etho Climate Leadership U.S. ETF (ETHO) has a volatility of 4.38%. This indicates that BFOR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ETHO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BFOR | ETHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.16% | 4.38% | -1.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.86% | 13.26% | -2.40% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.81% | 17.70% | -2.89% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.43% | 19.34% | +0.09% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.33% | 19.34% | +0.99% |
BFOR vs. ETHO - Expense Ratio Comparison
BFOR has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than ETHO's 0.45% expense ratio.
Dividends
BFOR vs. ETHO - Dividend Comparison
BFOR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.52%, less than ETHO's 0.70% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BFOR ALPS Barron's 400 ETF | 0.52% | 0.60% | 0.69% | 1.26% | 1.68% | 0.92% | 0.98% | 0.69% | 0.94% | 0.60% | 0.78% | 0.86% |
ETHO Amplify Etho Climate Leadership U.S. ETF | 0.70% | 0.86% | 0.69% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.95, BFOR and ETHO move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
ETHO has higher volatility (4.38%) compared to BFOR (3.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFOR dropped -41.27% vs ETHO's -25.50%.
On 1-year performance, ETHO leads with 37.11% vs 22.45% for BFOR. On fees, ETHO is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, BFOR has been the lower-risk option at 3.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, ETHO has performed better with a 37.11% return vs 22.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ETHO is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for BFOR.
ETHO has the higher dividend yield at 0.70%, compared with 0.52% for BFOR.
BFOR tracks Barron's 400 Index, while ETHO tracks Etho Climate Leadership Index. They also come from different issuers: SS&C and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for BFOR and 0.45% for ETHO.
ETHO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 1.52), 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 BFOR and ETHO
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