BSMW vs. BPH

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BSMW (Invesco BulletShares 2032 Municipal Bond ETF) and BPH (BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BSMW is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the Invesco BulletShares USD Municipal Bond 2032 Index, while BPH is a Oil & Gas fund actively managed by Precidian. BSMW is passively managed, while BPH is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.49, they often move in opposite directions. BSMW charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for BPH.

Performance

BSMW vs. BPH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco BulletShares 2032 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMW) and BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF (BPH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

BSMW

• 1D: 0.11%
• 1M: 0.55%
• YTD: 1.30%
• 6M: 1.59%
• 1Y: 6.93%
• 3Y*: 3.20%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BPH

• 1D: 1.20%
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BSMW vs. BPH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
BSMW Invesco BulletShares 2032 Municipal Bond ETF	0.82%
BPH BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF	2.83%

Correlation

The correlation between BSMW and BPH is -0.49, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 27, 2026	-0.49

BSMW vs. BPH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BSMW	BPH
Financial Services	1.7%	-
Consumer Cyclical	0.3%	-
Technology	0.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	100.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

BSMW vs. BPH — Risk / Return Rank

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

BSMW

BSMW Risk / Return Rank: 67
BSMW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
BSMW Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
BSMW Omega Ratio Rank: 83
BSMW Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
BSMW Martin Ratio Rank: 46

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.

BSMW vs. BPH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco BulletShares 2032 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMW) and BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF (BPH). 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.

	BSMW	BPH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.48	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.56	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.39	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.53	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BSMW	BPH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.48	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.69	9.48	-8.78

Drawdowns

BSMW vs. BPH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BSMW drawdown since its inception was -7.57%, which is greater than BPH's maximum drawdown of -2.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSMW and BPH.

Drawdown Indicators

	BSMW	BPH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.57%	-2.35%	-5.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.92%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.34%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.98%	0.00%	-0.98%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.72%	-1.08%	-0.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.92%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BSMW	BPH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.93%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.98%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.82%	25.75%	-22.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.00%	25.75%	-20.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.00%	25.75%	-20.75%

BSMW vs. BPH - Expense Ratio Comparison

BSMW has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than BPH's 0.19% 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

BSMW vs. BPH - Dividend Comparison

BSMW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.20%, while BPH has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BPH BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
BSMW Invesco BulletShares 2032 Municipal Bond ETF	3.20%	3.24%	3.48%	2.36%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BSMW and BPH in my portfolio?

BSMW and BPH have a correlation of -0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BSMW or BPH?

On fees, BSMW is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BSMW or BPH?

BSMW is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.19% for BPH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BSMW or BPH?

BSMW has the higher dividend yield at 3.20%, compared with 0.00% for BPH.

What is the main difference between BSMW and BPH?

BSMW is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while BPH is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Precidian. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for BSMW and 0.19% for BPH.