BKDV vs. BKMC

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

BKDV (BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF) and BKMC (BNY Mellon US Mid Cap Core Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BKDV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by BNY Mellon, while BKMC is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Morningstar US Mid Cap Index. BKDV is actively managed, while BKMC is passively managed. Over the past year, BKDV returned 30.25% vs 24.74% for BKMC. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BKDV charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for BKMC.

Performance

BKDV vs. BKMC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF (BKDV) and BNY Mellon US Mid Cap Core Equity ETF (BKMC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BKDV achieves a 13.89% return, which is significantly higher than BKMC's 11.69% return.

BKDV

• 1D: 1.07%
• 1M: 3.93%
• YTD: 13.89%
• 6M: 16.73%
• 1Y: 30.25%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BKMC

• 1D: 0.40%
• 1M: 3.22%
• YTD: 11.69%
• 6M: 12.55%
• 1Y: 24.74%
• 3Y*: 16.22%
• 5Y*: 8.06%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BKDV vs. BKMC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BKDV BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF	13.89%	18.58%	-0.91%
BKMC BNY Mellon US Mid Cap Core Equity ETF	11.69%	8.74%	0.35%

Correlation

The correlation between BKDV and BKMC is 0.87, 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	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 5, 2024	0.88

The correlation between BKDV and BKMC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

BKDV vs. BKMC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BKDV	BKMC
Financial Services	23.6%	12.4%
Industrials	15.4%	22.9%
Healthcare	14.4%	11.4%
Technology	13.5%	16.2%
Energy	8.3%	3.3%
Consumer Cyclical	7.2%	9.1%
Communication Services	7.1%	3.5%
Basic Materials	4.0%	4.6%
Consumer Defensive	3.8%	4.3%
Utilities	1.4%	2.4%
Real Estate	1.2%	7.6%

Return for Risk

BKDV vs. BKMC — Risk / Return Rank

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

BKDV

BKDV Risk / Return Rank: 80
BKDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
BKDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
BKDV Omega Ratio Rank: 75
BKDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
BKDV Martin Ratio Rank: 83

BKMC

BKMC Risk / Return Rank: 49
BKMC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
BKMC Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
BKMC Omega Ratio Rank: 44
BKMC Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
BKMC Martin Ratio Rank: 55

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.

BKDV vs. BKMC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF (BKDV) and BNY Mellon US Mid Cap Core Equity ETF (BKMC). 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.

	BKDV	BKMC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.57	1.64	+0.92
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.60	2.40	+1.19
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.29	+0.17
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.62	2.52	+2.10
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	17.01	9.72	+7.29
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BKDV vs. BKMC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BKDV Sharpe Ratio is 2.57, which is higher than the BKMC Sharpe Ratio of 1.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BKDV and BKMC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BKDV	BKMC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.57	1.64	+0.92
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.43	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.31	0.83	+0.48

Drawdowns

BKDV vs. BKMC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BKDV drawdown since its inception was -15.49%, smaller than the maximum BKMC drawdown of -25.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BKDV and BKMC.

Drawdown Indicators

	BKDV	BKMC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.49%	-25.02%	+9.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.65%	-9.82%	+3.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-23.68%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-25.02%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.40%	-6.55%	+4.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.81%	2.55%	-0.74%

Volatility

BKDV vs. BKMC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF (BKDV) is 3.53%, while BNY Mellon US Mid Cap Core Equity ETF (BKMC) has a volatility of 4.20%. This indicates that BKDV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BKMC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BKDV	BKMC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.53%	4.20%	-0.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.07%	10.97%	-1.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.84%	15.12%	-3.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.69%	18.77%	-3.08%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.69%	19.16%	-3.47%

BKDV vs. BKMC - Expense Ratio Comparison

BKDV has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than BKMC's 0.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

BKDV vs. BKMC - Dividend Comparison

BKDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.54%, less than BKMC's 1.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BKDV BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF	0.54%	0.62%	0.27%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
BKMC BNY Mellon US Mid Cap Core Equity ETF	1.38%	1.35%	1.54%	1.38%	1.63%	1.15%	0.86%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BKDV and BKMC in my portfolio?

BKDV and BKMC have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BKDV or BKMC?

BKMC has higher volatility (4.20%) compared to BKDV (3.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BKDV dropped -15.49% vs BKMC's -25.02%.

Which ETF is better, BKDV or BKMC?

On 1-year performance, BKDV leads with 30.25% vs 24.74% for BKMC. On fees, BKMC is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, BKDV has been the lower-risk option at 3.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BKDV or BKMC?

Over the 1-year period, BKDV has performed better with a 30.25% return vs 24.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BKDV or BKMC?

BKMC is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for BKDV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BKDV or BKMC?

BKMC has the higher dividend yield at 1.38%, compared with 0.54% for BKDV.

What is the main difference between BKDV and BKMC?

BKDV is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while BKMC is Mid Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for BKDV and 0.04% for BKMC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BKDV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.57 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.