CRBN vs. BBHL
CRBN (iShares MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target ETF) and BBHL (BBH Select Large Cap ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds - CRBN tracks the MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target Index while BBHL tracks the Actively Managed. Both are passively managed. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CRBN charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.71%/yr for BBHL.
Performance
CRBN vs. BBHL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CRBN achieves a 11.12% return, which is significantly higher than BBHL's 6.39% return.
CRBN
- 1D
- 0.18%
- 1M
- 4.24%
- YTD
- 11.12%
- 6M
- 12.10%
- 1Y
- 27.38%
- 3Y*
- 21.37%
- 5Y*
- 11.14%
- 10Y*
- 12.75%
BBHL
- 1D
- 0.94%
- 1M
- 4.01%
- YTD
- 6.39%
- 6M
- 6.61%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CRBN vs. BBHL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CRBN iShares MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target ETF | 11.12% | 3.48% |
BBHL BBH Select Large Cap ETF | 6.39% | 2.72% |
Correlation
The correlation between CRBN and BBHL is 0.87, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 18, 2025 | 0.87 |
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
CRBN vs. BBHL — Risk / Return Rank
CRBN
BBHL
CRBN vs. BBHL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target ETF (CRBN) and BBH Select Large Cap ETF (BBHL). 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.
| CRBN | BBHL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.73 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.06 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CRBN | BBHL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.11 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.70 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.76 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.70 | 1.41 | -0.72 |
Drawdowns
CRBN vs. BBHL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CRBN drawdown since its inception was -33.13%, which is greater than BBHL's maximum drawdown of -11.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRBN and BBHL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CRBN | BBHL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.13% | -11.99% | -21.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.08% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.60% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -27.04% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -33.13% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.64% | 0.00% | -0.64% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.20% | -2.98% | -2.22% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.28% | — | — |
Volatility
CRBN vs. BBHL - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CRBN | BBHL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.67% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.52% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.05% | 12.71% | +0.34% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.09% | 12.71% | +3.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.90% | 12.71% | +4.19% |
CRBN vs. BBHL - Expense Ratio Comparison
CRBN has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than BBHL's 0.71% expense ratio.
Dividends
CRBN vs. BBHL - Dividend Comparison
CRBN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.99%, while BBHL has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BBHL BBH Select Large Cap ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CRBN iShares MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target ETF | 1.99% | 2.21% | 1.94% | 2.01% | 1.95% | 1.57% | 1.41% | 2.27% | 2.51% | 2.05% | 2.27% | 2.01% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CRBN and BBHL have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CRBN is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CRBN is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.71% for BBHL.
CRBN has the higher dividend yield at 1.99%, compared with 0.00% for BBHL.
CRBN tracks MSCI ACWI Low Carbon Target Index, while BBHL tracks Actively Managed. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BBH. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for CRBN and 0.71% for BBHL.
Find the right allocation for CRBN and BBHL
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