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

Performance

BFOR vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). 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 12.73% return, which is significantly higher than SCHG's 1.35% return. Over the past 10 years, BFOR has underperformed SCHG with an annualized return of 13.11%, while SCHG has yielded a comparatively higher 18.65% annualized 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%

SCHG

1D
-1.37%
1M
-3.93%
YTD
1.35%
6M
0.09%
1Y
17.91%
3Y*
22.13%
5Y*
13.27%
10Y*
18.65%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BFOR vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
BFOR
ALPS Barron's 400 ETF
12.73%13.85%17.81%18.19%-15.92%30.71%17.60%21.30%-13.86%19.37%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
1.35%17.50%34.95%50.10%-31.80%28.11%39.14%36.02%-1.36%28.05%

Correlation

The correlation between BFOR and SCHG is 0.66, 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

0.66

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

0.67

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

0.74

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

0.74

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

0.78

The correlation between BFOR and SCHG shifts across timeframes, from 0.66 (1 year) to 0.78 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BFOR vs. SCHG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BFOR
SCHG

Financial Services

20.9%
6.6%

Technology

20.9%
46.7%

Industrials

16.5%
6.0%

Healthcare

11.7%
8.4%

Consumer Cyclical

10.7%
12.4%

Energy

6.9%
0.7%

Consumer Defensive

4.0%
1.6%

Communication Services

3.8%
15.3%

Basic Materials

2.8%
1.3%

Utilities

1.8%
0.4%

Real Estate

-

0.5%

Financial Services

BFOR
20.9%
SCHG
6.6%

Technology

BFOR
20.9%
SCHG
46.7%

Industrials

BFOR
16.5%
SCHG
6.0%

Healthcare

BFOR
11.7%
SCHG
8.4%

Consumer Cyclical

BFOR
10.7%
SCHG
12.4%

Energy

BFOR
6.9%
SCHG
0.7%

Consumer Defensive

BFOR
4.0%
SCHG
1.6%

Communication Services

BFOR
3.8%
SCHG
15.3%

Basic Materials

BFOR
2.8%
SCHG
1.3%

Utilities

BFOR
1.8%
SCHG
0.4%

Real Estate

BFOR

-

SCHG
0.5%

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. SCHG — Risk / Return Rank

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

BFOR
BFOR Risk / Return Rank: 5555
Overall Rank
BFOR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BFOR Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
BFOR Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
BFOR Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
BFOR Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
Martin Ratio Rank

SCHG
SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3030
Sortino Ratio Rank
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2323
Calmar Ratio Rank
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
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. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). 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.


BFORSCHGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.54

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.87

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.20

+0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.75

1.10

+1.65

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.06

3.58

+6.48

BFOR vs. SCHG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BFOR Sharpe Ratio is 1.65, which is higher than the SCHG Sharpe Ratio of 1.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BFOR and SCHG, 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. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BFOR drawdown since its inception was -41.27%, which is greater than SCHG's maximum drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFOR and SCHG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BFORSCHGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.27%

-34.59%

-6.68%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.98%

-16.41%

+7.43%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.91%

-23.39%

+1.48%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.93%

-34.59%

+8.66%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.27%

-34.59%

-6.68%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.71%

-6.46%

+5.75%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.40%

-5.20%

-1.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.45%

5.02%

-2.57%

Volatility

BFOR vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) is 4.11%, while Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) has a volatility of 5.91%. This indicates that BFOR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCHG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BFORSCHGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.11%

5.91%

-1.80%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.97%

12.52%

-1.55%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.03%

16.24%

-1.21%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.46%

22.38%

-2.92%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.40%

21.58%

-1.18%

BFOR vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison

BFOR has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG's 0.04% expense ratio.


Dividends

BFOR vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison

BFOR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%, more than SCHG's 0.38% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
0.38%0.36%0.39%0.46%0.55%0.42%0.52%0.82%1.27%1.01%1.04%1.22%

Frequently Asked Questions


BFOR and SCHG have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SCHG has higher volatility (5.91%) compared to BFOR (4.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFOR dropped -41.27% vs SCHG's -34.59%.

On 10-year performance, SCHG leads with 18.65% vs 13.11% for BFOR. On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% 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.

Over the 10-year period, SCHG has performed better with a 18.65% return vs 13.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SCHG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for BFOR.

BFOR has the higher dividend yield at 0.53%, compared with 0.38% for SCHG.

BFOR is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while SCHG is Large Cap Growth Equities. BFOR tracks Barron's 400 Index, while SCHG tracks Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. They also come from different issuers: SS&C and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for BFOR and 0.04% for SCHG.

BFOR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.65 vs 1.11), 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 SCHG

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