BLUC vs. ACEP

Last updated Aug 6, 2026

BLUC (Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF) and ACEP (ARS Core Equity Portfolio ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Their 0.74 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. BLUC charges 0.23%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for ACEP.

Performance

BLUC vs. ACEP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF (BLUC) and ARS Core Equity Portfolio ETF (ACEP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BLUC achieves a 11.99% return, which is significantly lower than ACEP's 24.65% return.

BLUC

• 1D: -0.28%
• 1M: 2.33%
• 6M: 12.99%
• YTD: 11.99%
• 1Y: 21.94%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 25.12%

ACEP

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 2.51%
• 6M: 15.44%
• YTD: 24.65%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ACEP ARS Core Equity Portfolio ETF	$36.53K	$36.84K	$48.24K
BLUC Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF	$691.35K	$726.25K	$1.13M

BLUC vs. ACEP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BLUC Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF	11.99%	4.72%
ACEP ARS Core Equity Portfolio ETF	24.65%	8.00%

Correlation

The correlation between BLUC and ACEP is 0.74, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 21, 2025	0.74

BLUC vs. ACEP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BLUC	ACEP
Technology	43.1%	34.3%
Communication Services	11.8%	1.2%
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	2.8%
Financial Services	9.5%	14.4%
Healthcare	7.8%	8.2%
Industrials	7.3%	12.1%
Consumer Defensive	3.7%	1.9%
Energy	2.3%	12.5%
Utilities	1.6%	-
Real Estate	1.6%	1.6%
Basic Materials	1.4%	11.1%

Return for Risk

BLUC vs. ACEP — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

BLUC

BLUC Risk / Return Rank: 54
BLUC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
BLUC Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
BLUC Omega Ratio Rank: 53
BLUC Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
BLUC Martin Ratio Rank: 57

ACEP

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

BLUC vs. ACEP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF (BLUC) and ARS Core Equity Portfolio ETF (ACEP). 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.

	BLUC	ACEP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.57	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.18	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.06	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.77	—	—

Drawdowns

BLUC vs. ACEP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BLUC drawdown since its inception was -10.69%, which is greater than ACEP's maximum drawdown of -7.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BLUC and ACEP.

Drawdown Indicators

	BLUC	ACEP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.69%	-7.06%	-3.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.69%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.28%	-0.44%	+0.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.76%	-1.74%	-0.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.83%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BLUC	ACEP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.60%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.38%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.09%	16.86%	-2.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.68%	16.86%	-3.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.68%	16.86%	-3.18%

BLUC vs. ACEP - Expense Ratio Comparison

BLUC has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is lower than ACEP's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

BLUC vs. ACEP - Dividend Comparison

BLUC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.61%, more than ACEP's 0.11% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
ACEP ARS Core Equity Portfolio ETF	0.11%	0.14%
BLUC Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF	0.61%	0.46%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BLUC and ACEP in my portfolio?

BLUC and ACEP have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BLUC or ACEP?

On fees, BLUC is cheaper at 0.23% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BLUC or ACEP?

BLUC is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for ACEP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BLUC or ACEP?

BLUC has the higher dividend yield at 0.61%, compared with 0.11% for ACEP.

What is the main difference between BLUC and ACEP?

They also come from different issuers: Bluemonte and ARS Investment Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for BLUC and 0.45% for ACEP.