BSMC vs. VOT

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

BSMC (Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF) and VOT (Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BSMC is a Small Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Brandes, while VOT is a Mid Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the CRSP US Mid Cap Growth Index. BSMC is actively managed, while VOT is passively managed. Over the past year, BSMC returned 24.47% vs 10.01% for VOT. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BSMC charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.05%/yr for VOT.

Performance

BSMC vs. VOT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF (BSMC) and Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF (VOT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BSMC achieves a 9.16% return, which is significantly higher than VOT's 7.86% return.

BSMC

• 1D: -0.33%
• 1M: -0.15%
• YTD: 9.16%
• 6M: 8.80%
• 1Y: 24.47%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

VOT

• 1D: -1.99%
• 1M: 3.19%
• YTD: 7.86%
• 6M: 5.95%
• 1Y: 10.01%
• 3Y*: 15.69%
• 5Y*: 5.73%
• 10Y*: 12.50%

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

BSMC vs. VOT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BSMC Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF	9.16%	15.52%	10.21%	11.69%
VOT Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF	7.86%	10.72%	16.38%	14.95%

Correlation

The correlation between BSMC and VOT is 0.65, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.65
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 5, 2023	0.71

The correlation between BSMC and VOT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

BSMC vs. VOT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BSMC	VOT
Healthcare	22.1%	8.9%
Industrials	19.1%	23.2%
Technology	15.8%	32.5%
Consumer Defensive	12.4%	0.8%
Financial Services	9.8%	6.9%
Energy	7.0%	1.9%
Consumer Cyclical	6.5%	12.8%
Basic Materials	3.7%	1.6%
Communication Services	3.5%	3.6%
Real Estate	-	4.5%
Utilities	-	3.2%

Return for Risk

BSMC vs. VOT — Risk / Return Rank

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

BSMC

BSMC Risk / Return Rank: 52
BSMC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
BSMC Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
BSMC Omega Ratio Rank: 46
BSMC Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
BSMC Martin Ratio Rank: 56

VOT

VOT Risk / Return Rank: 17
VOT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
VOT Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
VOT Omega Ratio Rank: 17
VOT Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
VOT Martin Ratio Rank: 18

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.

BSMC vs. VOT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF (BSMC) and Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF (VOT). 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.

	BSMC	VOT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.68	0.59	+1.09
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.49	0.93	+1.56
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.11	+0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.72	0.63	+2.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.63	1.87	+7.76

BSMC vs. VOT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BSMC Sharpe Ratio is 1.68, which is higher than the VOT Sharpe Ratio of 0.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BSMC and VOT, 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

BSMC vs. VOT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BSMC drawdown since its inception was -19.15%, smaller than the maximum VOT drawdown of -60.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSMC and VOT.

Drawdown Indicators

	BSMC	VOT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.15%	-60.16%	+41.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.02%	-15.96%	+6.94%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-21.77%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-37.19%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-37.19%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.03%	-1.99%	-1.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.65%	-9.94%	+7.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.55%	5.35%	-2.80%

Volatility

BSMC vs. VOT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF (BSMC) is 3.68%, while Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF (VOT) has a volatility of 7.06%. This indicates that BSMC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VOT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BSMC	VOT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.68%	7.06%	-3.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.28%	13.69%	-3.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.66%	16.92%	-2.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.07%	21.53%	-5.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.07%	21.04%	-4.97%

BSMC vs. VOT - Expense Ratio Comparison

BSMC has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than VOT's 0.05% expense ratio.

Dividends

BSMC vs. VOT - Dividend Comparison

BSMC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.95%, more than VOT's 0.62% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BSMC Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF	0.95%	1.17%	1.02%	0.15%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VOT Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth ETF	0.62%	0.64%	0.67%	0.71%	0.78%	0.34%	0.56%	0.78%	0.84%	0.72%	0.81%	0.81%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BSMC and VOT in my portfolio?

BSMC and VOT have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BSMC or VOT?

VOT has higher volatility (7.06%) compared to BSMC (3.68%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BSMC dropped -19.15% vs VOT's -60.16%.

Which ETF is better, BSMC or VOT?

On 1-year performance, BSMC leads with 24.47% vs 10.01% for VOT. On fees, VOT is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, BSMC has been the lower-risk option at 3.68%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BSMC or VOT?

Over the 1-year period, BSMC has performed better with a 24.47% return vs 10.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BSMC or VOT?

VOT is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for BSMC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BSMC or VOT?

BSMC has the higher dividend yield at 0.95%, compared with 0.62% for VOT.

What is the main difference between BSMC and VOT?

BSMC is categorized as Small Cap Value Equities, while VOT is Mid Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Brandes and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for BSMC and 0.05% for VOT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BSMC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.68 vs 0.59), 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.