PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BINV vs. BUSA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BINV vs. BUSA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Brandes International ETF (BINV) and Brandes U.S. Value ETF (BUSA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BINV achieves a 6.64% return, which is significantly lower than BUSA's 8.42% return.


BINV

1D
1.13%
1M
0.59%
YTD
6.64%
6M
8.85%
1Y
22.75%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BUSA

1D
1.39%
1M
2.61%
YTD
8.42%
6M
10.80%
1Y
24.37%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BINV vs. BUSA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
BINV
Brandes International ETF
6.64%37.84%7.71%12.66%
BUSA
Brandes U.S. Value ETF
8.42%17.56%15.76%10.65%

Correlation

The correlation between BINV and BUSA is 0.65, 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

0.65

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 6, 2023

0.63

The correlation between BINV and BUSA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

BINV vs. BUSA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BINV
BUSA

Consumer Defensive

22.1%
5.1%

Healthcare

17.5%
23.8%

Consumer Cyclical

14.2%
4.9%

Technology

11.3%
12.9%

Industrials

10.7%
12.4%

Financial Services

7.8%
20.1%

Communication Services

5.4%
5.6%

Basic Materials

4.8%
4.1%

Energy

2.6%
7.3%

Real Estate

2.0%

-

Utilities

1.6%
3.4%

Consumer Defensive

BINV
22.1%
BUSA
5.1%

Healthcare

BINV
17.5%
BUSA
23.8%

Consumer Cyclical

BINV
14.2%
BUSA
4.9%

Technology

BINV
11.3%
BUSA
12.9%

Industrials

BINV
10.7%
BUSA
12.4%

Financial Services

BINV
7.8%
BUSA
20.1%

Communication Services

BINV
5.4%
BUSA
5.6%

Basic Materials

BINV
4.8%
BUSA
4.1%

Energy

BINV
2.6%
BUSA
7.3%

Real Estate

BINV
2.0%
BUSA

-

Utilities

BINV
1.6%
BUSA
3.4%

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

BINV vs. BUSA — Risk / Return Rank

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

BINV
BINV Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
BINV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BINV Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
BINV Omega Ratio Rank: 4646
Omega Ratio Rank
BINV Calmar Ratio Rank: 4141
Calmar Ratio Rank
BINV Martin Ratio Rank: 4343
Martin Ratio Rank

BUSA
BUSA Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
BUSA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BUSA Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
BUSA Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
BUSA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
BUSA Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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.

BINV vs. BUSA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brandes International ETF (BINV) and Brandes U.S. Value ETF (BUSA). 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.


BINVBUSADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.42

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.56

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.36

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.99

3.22

-1.23

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.87

10.94

-4.07

BINV vs. BUSA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BINV Sharpe Ratio is 1.64, which is comparable to the BUSA Sharpe Ratio of 2.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BINV and BUSA, 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


BINVBUSADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.64

2.06

-0.42

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.66

1.49

+0.17

Drawdowns

BINV vs. BUSA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BINV drawdown since its inception was -14.91%, which is greater than BUSA's maximum drawdown of -14.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BINV and BUSA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BINVBUSADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-14.91%

-14.19%

-0.72%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.50%

-7.61%

-3.89%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-4.24%

0.00%

-4.24%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.44%

-2.15%

-0.29%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.32%

2.23%

+1.09%

Volatility

BINV vs. BUSA - Volatility Comparison

Brandes International ETF (BINV) has a higher volatility of 4.14% compared to Brandes U.S. Value ETF (BUSA) at 2.79%. This indicates that BINV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BUSA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BINVBUSADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.14%

2.79%

+1.35%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.02%

8.53%

+2.49%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.93%

11.88%

+2.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.77%

13.66%

+1.11%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.77%

13.66%

+1.11%

BINV vs. BUSA - Expense Ratio Comparison

BINV has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than BUSA's 0.60% expense ratio.


Dividends

BINV vs. BUSA - Dividend Comparison

BINV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.06%, more than BUSA's 1.46% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
BINV
Brandes International ETF
2.06%2.23%2.40%0.28%
BUSA
Brandes U.S. Value ETF
1.46%1.53%1.37%0.22%

Frequently Asked Questions


BINV and BUSA have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BINV has higher volatility (4.14%) compared to BUSA (2.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BINV dropped -14.91% vs BUSA's -14.19%.

On 1-year performance, BUSA leads with 24.37% vs 22.75% for BINV. On fees, BUSA is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, BUSA has been the lower-risk option at 2.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BUSA has performed better with a 24.37% return vs 22.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BUSA is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for BINV.

BINV has the higher dividend yield at 2.06%, compared with 1.46% for BUSA.

BINV is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while BUSA is Large Cap Value Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for BINV and 0.60% for BUSA.

BUSA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.06 vs 1.64), 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 BINV and BUSA

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