BUSA vs. ILCV

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

BUSA (Brandes U.S. Value ETF) and ILCV (iShares Morningstar Value ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. BUSA is actively managed, while ILCV is passively managed. Over the past year, BUSA returned 24.37% vs 28.28% for ILCV. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BUSA charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for ILCV.

Performance

BUSA vs. ILCV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Brandes U.S. Value ETF (BUSA) and iShares Morningstar Value ETF (ILCV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with BUSA having a 8.42% return and ILCV slightly higher at 8.79%.

BUSA

• 1D: 1.39%
• 1M: 2.61%
• YTD: 8.42%
• 6M: 10.80%
• 1Y: 24.37%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ILCV

• 1D: 0.97%
• 1M: 2.91%
• YTD: 8.79%
• 6M: 8.78%
• 1Y: 28.28%
• 3Y*: 19.11%
• 5Y*: 11.63%
• 10Y*: 11.69%

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

BUSA vs. ILCV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BUSA Brandes U.S. Value ETF	8.42%	17.56%	15.76%	10.65%
ILCV iShares Morningstar Value ETF	8.79%	18.79%	17.03%	11.84%

Correlation

The correlation between BUSA and ILCV is 0.86, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 6, 2023	0.90

The correlation between BUSA and ILCV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

BUSA vs. ILCV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BUSA	ILCV
Healthcare	23.8%	11.5%
Financial Services	20.1%	16.5%
Technology	12.9%	23.8%
Industrials	12.4%	8.8%
Energy	7.3%	6.0%
Communication Services	5.6%	8.0%
Consumer Defensive	5.1%	7.6%
Consumer Cyclical	4.9%	9.5%
Basic Materials	4.1%	2.4%
Utilities	3.4%	3.5%
Real Estate	-	2.0%

Return for Risk

BUSA vs. ILCV — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUSA

BUSA Risk / Return Rank: 63
BUSA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
BUSA Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
BUSA Omega Ratio Rank: 61
BUSA Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
BUSA Martin Ratio Rank: 62

ILCV

ILCV Risk / Return Rank: 86
ILCV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
ILCV Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
ILCV Omega Ratio Rank: 86
ILCV Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
ILCV Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

BUSA vs. ILCV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brandes U.S. Value ETF (BUSA) and iShares Morningstar Value ETF (ILCV). 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.

	BUSA	ILCV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.06	2.89	-0.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.93	4.07	-1.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.53	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.22	4.34	-1.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.94	17.95	-7.00
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BUSA vs. ILCV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUSA Sharpe Ratio is 2.06, which is comparable to the ILCV Sharpe Ratio of 2.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUSA and ILCV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BUSA	ILCV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.06	2.89	-0.83
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.82	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.70	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.49	0.46	+1.03

Drawdowns

BUSA vs. ILCV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUSA drawdown since its inception was -14.19%, smaller than the maximum ILCV drawdown of -58.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUSA and ILCV.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUSA	ILCV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.19%	-58.63%	+44.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.61%	-6.55%	-1.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-14.95%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-18.58%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-35.53%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.15%	-9.32%	+7.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.23%	1.58%	+0.65%

Volatility

BUSA vs. ILCV - Volatility Comparison

Brandes U.S. Value ETF (BUSA) has a higher volatility of 2.79% compared to iShares Morningstar Value ETF (ILCV) at 2.06%. This indicates that BUSA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ILCV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUSA	ILCV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.79%	2.06%	+0.73%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.53%	7.03%	+1.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.88%	9.85%	+2.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.66%	14.22%	-0.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.66%	16.66%	-3.00%

BUSA vs. ILCV - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUSA has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than ILCV's 0.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

BUSA vs. ILCV - Dividend Comparison

BUSA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.46%, less than ILCV's 1.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BUSA Brandes U.S. Value ETF	1.46%	1.53%	1.37%	0.22%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
ILCV iShares Morningstar Value ETF	1.61%	1.77%	1.99%	2.27%	2.32%	2.01%	2.96%	2.70%	2.93%	2.32%	2.76%	3.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUSA and ILCV in my portfolio?

BUSA and ILCV have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BUSA or ILCV?

BUSA has higher volatility (2.79%) compared to ILCV (2.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUSA dropped -14.19% vs ILCV's -58.63%.

Which ETF is better, BUSA or ILCV?

On 1-year performance, ILCV leads with 28.28% vs 24.37% for BUSA. On fees, ILCV is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, ILCV has been the lower-risk option at 2.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BUSA or ILCV?

Over the 1-year period, ILCV has performed better with a 28.28% return vs 24.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUSA or ILCV?

ILCV is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for BUSA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BUSA or ILCV?

ILCV has the higher dividend yield at 1.61%, compared with 1.46% for BUSA.

What is the main difference between BUSA and ILCV?

They also come from different issuers: Brandes and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for BUSA and 0.04% for ILCV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ILCV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.89 vs 2.06), 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.