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

Performance

BLUC vs. BLST - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF (BLUC) and Bluemonte Short Term Bond ETF (BLST). 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 higher than BLST's 0.27% return.


BLUC

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

BLST

1D
0.12%
1M
-0.34%
6M
0.13%
YTD
0.27%
1Y
2.31%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
2.65%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$253.17K$280.70K$415.30K
$620.44K$688.65K$1.12M

BLUC vs. BLST - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
BLUC
Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF
10.10%14.69%
BLST
Bluemonte Short Term Bond ETF
0.27%2.68%

Correlation

The correlation between BLUC and BLST is 0.31, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


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

0.31

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

0.29

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. BLST — 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

BLST
BLST Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
BLST Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BLST Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
BLST Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
BLST Calmar Ratio Rank: 3737
Calmar Ratio Rank
BLST Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
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. BLST - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF (BLUC) and Bluemonte Short Term Bond ETF (BLST). 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.


BLUCBLSTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.44

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.56

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.18

+0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.98

1.38

+0.61

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.47

3.80

+3.66

BLUC vs. BLST - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BLUC Sharpe Ratio is 1.51, which is higher than the BLST Sharpe Ratio of 1.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BLUC and BLST, 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. BLST - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BLUC drawdown since its inception was -10.69%, which is greater than BLST's maximum drawdown of -1.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BLUC and BLST.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BLUCBLSTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-10.69%

-1.69%

-9.00%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.69%

-1.69%

-9.00%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.57%

-0.90%

-0.67%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.78%

-0.41%

-1.37%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.83%

0.61%

+2.22%

Volatility

BLUC vs. BLST - Volatility Comparison

Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF (BLUC) has a higher volatility of 4.31% compared to Bluemonte Short Term Bond ETF (BLST) at 0.64%. This indicates that BLUC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BLST based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BLUCBLSTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.31%

0.64%

+3.67%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.30%

1.79%

+9.51%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.06%

2.17%

+11.89%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.60%

2.25%

+11.35%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.60%

2.25%

+11.35%

BLUC vs. BLST - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BLUC and BLST 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. BLST - Dividend Comparison

BLUC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.62%, less than BLST's 3.78% yield.


PositionTTM2025
BLST
Bluemonte Short Term Bond ETF
3.78%2.11%
BLUC
Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF
0.62%0.46%

Frequently Asked Questions


BLUC and BLST have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BLUC has higher volatility (4.31%) compared to BLST (0.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BLUC dropped -10.69% vs BLST's -1.69%.

On 1-year performance, BLUC leads with 21.07% vs 2.31% for BLST. Both ETFs have the same 0.23% expense ratio. On volatility, BLST has been the lower-risk option at 0.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BLUC has performed better with a 21.07% return vs 2.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

BLST has the higher dividend yield at 3.78%, compared with 0.62% for BLUC.

BLUC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BLST is Short-Term Bond.

BLUC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.51 vs 1.07), 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 BLST

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