PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BLUC vs. BINT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BLUC vs. BINT - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BLUC achieves a 10.10% return, which is significantly lower than BINT's 14.01% return.


BLUC

1D
1.41%
1M
1.57%
6M
9.03%
YTD
10.10%
1Y
21.07%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
23.35%

BINT

1D
0.72%
1M
0.16%
6M
8.18%
YTD
14.01%
1Y
28.06%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
27.03%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$862.27K$966.71K$1.78M
$620.44K$688.65K$1.12M

BLUC vs. BINT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
BLUC
Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF
10.10%14.69%
BINT
Bluemonte Global Equity ETF
14.01%14.43%

Correlation

The correlation between BLUC and BINT is 0.87, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2025

0.86

The correlation between BLUC and BINT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

BLUC vs. BINT - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BLUC
BINT

Technology

43.1%
28.7%

Communication Services

11.8%
5.9%

Consumer Cyclical

10.0%
8.2%

Financial Services

9.5%
18.5%

Healthcare

7.8%
7.3%

Industrials

7.3%
13.0%

Consumer Defensive

3.7%
4.7%

Energy

2.3%
3.9%

Utilities

1.6%
2.6%

Real Estate

1.6%
2.1%

Basic Materials

1.4%
5.2%

Technology

BLUC
43.1%
BINT
28.7%

Communication Services

BLUC
11.8%
BINT
5.9%

Consumer Cyclical

BLUC
10.0%
BINT
8.2%

Financial Services

BLUC
9.5%
BINT
18.5%

Healthcare

BLUC
7.8%
BINT
7.3%

Industrials

BLUC
7.3%
BINT
13.0%

Consumer Defensive

BLUC
3.7%
BINT
4.7%

Energy

BLUC
2.3%
BINT
3.9%

Utilities

BLUC
1.6%
BINT
2.6%

Real Estate

BLUC
1.6%
BINT
2.1%

Basic Materials

BLUC
1.4%
BINT
5.2%

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

BLUC vs. BINT — Risk / Return Rank

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

BLUC
BLUC Risk / Return Rank: 5555
Overall Rank
BLUC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BLUC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
BLUC Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
BLUC Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
BLUC Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank

BINT
BINT Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
BINT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BINT Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
BINT Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
BINT Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
BINT Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
Martin Ratio Rank
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. BINT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


BLUCBINTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.22

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.28

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.32

-0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.98

2.58

-0.60

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.47

9.95

-2.49

BLUC vs. BINT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BLUC Sharpe Ratio is 1.51, which is comparable to the BINT Sharpe Ratio of 1.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BLUC and BINT, 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...

Drawdowns

BLUC vs. BINT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BLUC drawdown since its inception was -10.69%, roughly equal to the maximum BINT drawdown of -10.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BLUC and BINT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BLUCBINTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-10.69%

-10.94%

+0.25%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.69%

-10.94%

+0.25%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.57%

-2.42%

+0.85%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.78%

-1.65%

-0.13%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.83%

2.83%

0.00%

Volatility

BLUC vs. BINT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF (BLUC) is 4.31%, while Bluemonte Global Equity ETF (BINT) has a volatility of 5.24%. This indicates that BLUC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BINT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BLUCBINTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.31%

5.24%

-0.93%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.30%

14.39%

-3.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.06%

16.32%

-2.26%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.60%

15.83%

-2.23%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.60%

15.83%

-2.23%

BLUC vs. BINT - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BLUC and BINT have an expense ratio of 0.23%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

BLUC vs. BINT - Dividend Comparison

BLUC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.62%, less than BINT's 1.75% yield.


PositionTTM2025
BINT
Bluemonte Global Equity ETF
1.75%1.08%
BLUC
Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF
0.62%0.46%

Frequently Asked Questions


BLUC and BINT 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.

BINT has higher volatility (5.24%) compared to BLUC (4.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BLUC dropped -10.69% vs BINT's -10.94%.

On 1-year performance, BINT leads with 28.06% vs 21.07% for BLUC. Both ETFs have the same 0.23% expense ratio. On volatility, BLUC has been the lower-risk option at 4.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BINT has performed better with a 28.06% return vs 21.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BLUC and BINT have the same expense ratio: 0.23% per year.

BINT has the higher dividend yield at 1.75%, compared with 0.62% for BLUC.

BLUC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BINT is Global Equities.

BINT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.73 vs 1.51), 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 BLUC and BINT

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