BLUX vs. EQL

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

BLUX (Bluemonte Dynamic Total Market ETF) and EQL (ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. BLUX is actively managed, while EQL is passively managed. Over the past year, BLUX returned 25.99% vs 19.50% for EQL. Their correlation of 0.82 means they have usually moved in the same direction. BLUX charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.27%/yr for EQL.

Performance

BLUX vs. EQL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bluemonte Dynamic Total Market ETF (BLUX) and ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BLUX achieves a 15.77% return, which is significantly higher than EQL's 11.79% return.

BLUX

• 1D: 1.48%
• 1M: 1.02%
• 6M: 11.30%
• YTD: 15.77%
• 1Y: 25.99%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 26.95%

EQL

• 1D: 0.98%
• 1M: 1.30%
• 6M: 7.57%
• YTD: 11.79%
• 1Y: 19.50%
• 3Y*: 15.68%
• 5Y*: 10.87%
• 10Y*: 12.40%
• ALL TIME*: 13.54%

*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)
BLUX Bluemonte Dynamic Total Market ETF	$957.95K	$1.08M	$1.85M
EQL ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF	$3.24M	$2.89M	$2.73M

BLUX vs. EQL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BLUX Bluemonte Dynamic Total Market ETF	15.77%	12.62%
EQL ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF	11.79%	9.24%

Correlation

The correlation between BLUX and EQL is 0.81, 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.	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2025	0.82

The correlation between BLUX and EQL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

BLUX vs. EQL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BLUX	EQL
Technology	26.7%	10.2%
Financial Services	14.7%	9.1%
Industrials	12.4%	9.3%
Healthcare	12.0%	9.4%
Consumer Cyclical	9.8%	9.6%
Communication Services	6.1%	8.9%
Real Estate	4.8%	8.7%
Energy	4.1%	8.7%
Consumer Defensive	3.8%	8.8%
Basic Materials	3.0%	8.0%
Utilities	2.7%	9.4%

Return for Risk

BLUX vs. EQL — Risk / Return Rank

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

BLUX

BLUX Risk / Return Rank: 74
BLUX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
BLUX Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
BLUX Omega Ratio Rank: 70
BLUX Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
BLUX Martin Ratio Rank: 82

EQL

EQL Risk / Return Rank: 85
EQL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
EQL Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
EQL Omega Ratio Rank: 85
EQL Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
EQL Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

BLUX vs. EQL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bluemonte Dynamic Total Market ETF (BLUX) and ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL). 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.

	BLUX	EQL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.82	2.07	-0.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.57	2.89	-0.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.38	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.89	3.16	-0.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.04	12.39	-0.35

BLUX vs. EQL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BLUX Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is comparable to the EQL Sharpe Ratio of 2.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BLUX and EQL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BLUX vs. EQL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BLUX drawdown since its inception was -9.03%, smaller than the maximum EQL drawdown of -35.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BLUX and EQL.

Drawdown Indicators

	BLUX	EQL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.03%	-35.65%	+26.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.03%	-6.19%	-2.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.07%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.24%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.65%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.26%	-3.23%	+1.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.16%	1.58%	+0.58%

Volatility

BLUX vs. EQL - Volatility Comparison

Bluemonte Dynamic Total Market ETF (BLUX) has a higher volatility of 3.64% compared to ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL) at 2.29%. This indicates that BLUX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EQL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BLUX	EQL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.64%	2.29%	+1.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.94%	7.09%	+3.85%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.34%	9.47%	+4.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.96%	14.52%	-0.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.96%	16.49%	-2.53%

BLUX vs. EQL - Expense Ratio Comparison

BLUX has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than EQL's 0.27% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

BLUX vs. EQL - Dividend Comparison

BLUX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.06%, less than EQL's 1.34% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BLUX Bluemonte Dynamic Total Market ETF	1.06%	0.73%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
EQL ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF	1.34%	1.73%	1.78%	1.96%	2.14%	1.69%	2.29%	1.95%	2.39%	1.97%	2.89%	2.07%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BLUX and EQL in my portfolio?

BLUX and EQL have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BLUX or EQL?

BLUX has higher volatility (3.64%) compared to EQL (2.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BLUX dropped -9.03% vs EQL's -35.65%.

Which ETF is better, BLUX or EQL?

On 1-year performance, BLUX leads with 25.99% vs 19.50% for EQL. On fees, BLUX is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, EQL has been the lower-risk option at 2.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BLUX or EQL?

Over the 1-year period, BLUX has performed better with a 25.99% return vs 19.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BLUX or EQL?

BLUX is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.27% for EQL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BLUX or EQL?

EQL has the higher dividend yield at 1.34%, compared with 1.06% for BLUX.

What is the main difference between BLUX and EQL?

They also come from different issuers: Bluemonte and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for BLUX and 0.27% for EQL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EQL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs 1.82), 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.