PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CSM vs. SMDV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CSM vs. SMDV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Proshares Large Cap Core Plus (CSM) and ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF (SMDV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CSM achieves a 9.15% return, which is significantly lower than SMDV's 18.11% return. Over the past 10 years, CSM has outperformed SMDV with an annualized return of 14.08%, while SMDV has yielded a comparatively lower 7.53% annualized return.


CSM

1D
0.77%
1M
1.39%
6M
8.81%
YTD
9.15%
1Y
23.59%
3Y*
19.26%
5Y*
12.61%
10Y*
14.08%
ALL TIME*
14.88%

SMDV

1D
-0.18%
1M
0.26%
6M
10.74%
YTD
18.11%
1Y
23.79%
3Y*
10.63%
5Y*
6.99%
10Y*
7.53%
ALL TIME*
8.24%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$421.46K$485.98K$561.72K
$4.61M$5.90M$3.47M

CSM vs. SMDV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CSM
Proshares Large Cap Core Plus
9.15%21.84%22.09%23.50%-18.27%33.13%10.94%29.26%-7.88%22.52%
SMDV
ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF
18.11%0.26%7.03%8.99%-5.90%18.98%-4.74%17.23%-0.58%4.63%

Correlation

The correlation between CSM and SMDV is 0.44, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.44

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.57

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.66

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.66

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2015

0.65

Over the past year, the correlation between CSM and SMDV has dropped to 0.44 - well below their long-term average of 0.65, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

CSM vs. SMDV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CSM
SMDV

Technology

29.3%
0.8%

Financial Services

16.5%
31.5%

Consumer Cyclical

8.9%
5.1%

Industrials

8.8%
21.8%

Healthcare

8.4%
1.9%

Communication Services

6.8%
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

4.5%
3.9%

Real Estate

4.2%
6.0%

Utilities

4.1%
17.3%

Energy

2.8%

-

Basic Materials

2.5%
10.5%

Technology

CSM
29.3%
SMDV
0.8%

Financial Services

CSM
16.5%
SMDV
31.5%

Consumer Cyclical

CSM
8.9%
SMDV
5.1%

Industrials

CSM
8.8%
SMDV
21.8%

Healthcare

CSM
8.4%
SMDV
1.9%

Communication Services

CSM
6.8%
SMDV
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

CSM
4.5%
SMDV
3.9%

Real Estate

CSM
4.2%
SMDV
6.0%

Utilities

CSM
4.1%
SMDV
17.3%

Energy

CSM
2.8%
SMDV

-

Basic Materials

CSM
2.5%
SMDV
10.5%

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

CSM vs. SMDV — Risk / Return Rank

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

CSM
CSM Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
CSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
CSM Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
CSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
CSM Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank

SMDV
SMDV Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
SMDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SMDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
SMDV Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
SMDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
SMDV Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CSM vs. SMDV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Proshares Large Cap Core Plus (CSM) and ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF (SMDV). 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.


CSMSMDVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.26

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.26

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.32

2.30

+0.03

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.34

7.27

+2.08

CSM vs. SMDV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CSM Sharpe Ratio is 1.72, which is comparable to the SMDV Sharpe Ratio of 1.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CSM and SMDV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

CSM vs. SMDV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSM drawdown since its inception was -36.11%, which is greater than SMDV's maximum drawdown of -34.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSM and SMDV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CSMSMDVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-36.11%

-34.12%

-1.99%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.40%

-9.79%

+0.39%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.30%

-21.23%

+2.93%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.82%

-21.23%

-2.59%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.11%

-34.12%

-1.99%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.69%

-2.36%

+1.67%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.02%

-5.87%

+1.85%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.34%

3.09%

-0.75%

Volatility

CSM vs. SMDV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Proshares Large Cap Core Plus (CSM) is 3.59%, while ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF (SMDV) has a volatility of 4.40%. This indicates that CSM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SMDV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CSMSMDVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.59%

4.40%

-0.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.64%

10.24%

-0.60%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.69%

15.45%

-2.76%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.19%

18.56%

-1.37%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.37%

20.75%

-2.38%

CSM vs. SMDV - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSM has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than SMDV's 0.40% expense ratio.


Dividends

CSM vs. SMDV - Dividend Comparison

CSM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.04%, less than SMDV's 2.29% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CSM
Proshares Large Cap Core Plus
1.04%1.04%1.06%1.17%1.37%0.78%1.21%1.41%1.54%1.28%1.49%1.67%
SMDV
ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF
2.29%2.67%2.68%2.69%2.51%2.02%2.13%2.03%1.97%1.84%1.35%1.81%

Frequently Asked Questions


CSM and SMDV have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SMDV has higher volatility (4.40%) compared to CSM (3.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CSM dropped -36.11% vs SMDV's -34.12%.

On 10-year performance, CSM leads with 14.08% vs 7.53% for SMDV. On fees, SMDV is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, CSM has been the lower-risk option at 3.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, CSM has performed better with a 14.08% return vs 7.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SMDV is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for CSM.

SMDV has the higher dividend yield at 2.29%, compared with 1.04% for CSM.

CSM is categorized as Long-Short, while SMDV is Small Cap Blend Equities. CSM tracks Credit Suisse 130/30 Large-Cap Index, while SMDV tracks Russell 2000 Dividend Growth Index. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for CSM and 0.40% for SMDV.

CSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.72 vs 1.46), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CSM and SMDV

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