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

Performance

BFOR vs. VTWO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) and Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF (VTWO). 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 lower than VTWO's 17.08% return. Over the past 10 years, BFOR has outperformed VTWO with an annualized return of 12.37%, while VTWO has yielded a comparatively lower 11.07% 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%

VTWO

1D
-1.38%
1M
3.51%
YTD
17.08%
6M
15.89%
1Y
39.34%
3Y*
18.11%
5Y*
6.28%
10Y*
11.07%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BFOR vs. VTWO - 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%
VTWO
Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF
17.08%12.90%11.55%17.08%-20.49%14.79%20.22%25.81%-11.15%14.69%

Correlation

The correlation between BFOR and VTWO is 0.94, 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

0.94

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

0.94

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

0.94

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

0.94

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

0.94

The correlation between BFOR and VTWO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

BFOR vs. VTWO - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BFOR
VTWO

Financial Services

21.3%
15.7%

Technology

18.8%
17.0%

Industrials

16.7%
17.7%

Healthcare

12.0%
16.5%

Consumer Cyclical

11.1%
8.4%

Energy

7.8%
6.1%

Consumer Defensive

4.2%
2.4%

Communication Services

3.6%
2.4%

Basic Materials

2.8%
4.8%

Utilities

1.9%
2.9%

Real Estate

-

6.1%

Financial Services

BFOR
21.3%
VTWO
15.7%

Technology

BFOR
18.8%
VTWO
17.0%

Industrials

BFOR
16.7%
VTWO
17.7%

Healthcare

BFOR
12.0%
VTWO
16.5%

Consumer Cyclical

BFOR
11.1%
VTWO
8.4%

Energy

BFOR
7.8%
VTWO
6.1%

Consumer Defensive

BFOR
4.2%
VTWO
2.4%

Communication Services

BFOR
3.6%
VTWO
2.4%

Basic Materials

BFOR
2.8%
VTWO
4.8%

Utilities

BFOR
1.9%
VTWO
2.9%

Real Estate

BFOR

-

VTWO
6.1%

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. VTWO — 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

VTWO
VTWO Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
VTWO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VTWO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
VTWO Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
VTWO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
VTWO Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
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. VTWO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) and Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF (VTWO). 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.


BFORVTWODifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.50

2.07

-0.57

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.23

2.88

-0.64

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.34

-0.08

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.46

3.60

-1.13

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

9.02

12.79

-3.77

BFOR vs. VTWO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BFOR Sharpe Ratio is 1.50, which is comparable to the VTWO Sharpe Ratio of 2.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BFOR and VTWO, 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


BFORVTWODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.50

2.07

-0.57

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.52

0.28

+0.24

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

0.48

+0.13

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.59

0.52

+0.07

Drawdowns

BFOR vs. VTWO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BFOR drawdown since its inception was -41.27%, roughly equal to the maximum VTWO drawdown of -41.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFOR and VTWO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BFORVTWODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.27%

-41.19%

-0.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.98%

-10.99%

+2.01%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.91%

-27.57%

+5.66%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.93%

-31.88%

+5.95%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.27%

-41.19%

-0.08%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.49%

-1.50%

+1.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.43%

-8.39%

+1.96%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.45%

3.08%

-0.63%

Volatility

BFOR vs. VTWO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ALPS Barron's 400 ETF (BFOR) is 3.52%, while Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF (VTWO) has a volatility of 5.73%. This indicates that BFOR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VTWO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BFORVTWODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.52%

5.73%

-2.21%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.64%

13.50%

-2.86%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.80%

19.12%

-4.32%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.41%

22.48%

-3.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.41%

23.08%

-2.67%

BFOR vs. VTWO - Expense Ratio Comparison

BFOR has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than VTWO's 0.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

BFOR vs. VTWO - Dividend Comparison

BFOR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.54%, less than VTWO's 1.08% 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%
VTWO
Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF
1.08%1.25%1.21%1.45%1.48%1.13%0.92%1.36%1.41%1.18%1.27%1.23%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.94, BFOR and VTWO 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.

VTWO has higher volatility (5.73%) compared to BFOR (3.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFOR dropped -41.27% vs VTWO's -41.19%.

On 10-year performance, BFOR leads with 12.37% vs 11.07% for VTWO. On fees, VTWO is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, BFOR has been the lower-risk option at 3.52%. 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 11.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VTWO is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for BFOR.

VTWO has the higher dividend yield at 1.08%, compared with 0.54% for BFOR.

BFOR is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while VTWO is Small Cap Blend Equities. BFOR tracks Barron's 400 Index, while VTWO tracks Russell 2000 Index. They also come from different issuers: SS&C and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for BFOR and 0.10% for VTWO.

VTWO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs 1.50), 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 VTWO

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