BGRFX vs. COST

In the year-to-date period, BGRFX achieves a 8.47% return, which is significantly lower than COST's 45.62% return. Over the past 10 years, BGRFX has underperformed COST with an annualized return of 3.31%, while COST has yielded a comparatively higher 23.82% annualized return.

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Baron Growth Fund (BGRFX) and Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST). 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.

The current BGRFX Sharpe Ratio is 0.85, which is lower than the COST Sharpe Ratio of 3.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BGRFX and COST, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

BGRFX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while COST's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.04%.

The maximum BGRFX drawdown since its inception was -58.19%, which is greater than COST's maximum drawdown of -53.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BGRFX and COST. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.

The current volatility for Baron Growth Fund (BGRFX) is 4.45%, while Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) has a volatility of 5.89%. This indicates that BGRFX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than COST based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.