EBIT vs. BSVO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EBIT (Harbor AlphaEdge Small Cap Earners ETF) and BSVO (EA Bridgeway Omni Small-Cap Value ETF) are both Small Cap Value Equities funds. EBIT is passively managed, while BSVO is actively managed. Over the past year, EBIT returned 26.62% vs 41.30% for BSVO. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. EBIT charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.47%/yr for BSVO.

Performance

EBIT vs. BSVO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Harbor AlphaEdge Small Cap Earners ETF (EBIT) and EA Bridgeway Omni Small-Cap Value ETF (BSVO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EBIT achieves a 12.09% return, which is significantly lower than BSVO's 18.09% return.

EBIT

• 1D: -1.12%
• 1M: 0.30%
• YTD: 12.09%
• 6M: 10.33%
• 1Y: 26.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BSVO

• 1D: -1.86%
• 1M: 0.33%
• YTD: 18.09%
• 6M: 17.20%
• 1Y: 41.30%
• 3Y*: 18.56%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EBIT vs. BSVO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EBIT Harbor AlphaEdge Small Cap Earners ETF	12.09%	6.85%	8.29%
BSVO EA Bridgeway Omni Small-Cap Value ETF	18.09%	9.21%	9.12%

Correlation

The correlation between EBIT and BSVO is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.97
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 11, 2024	0.97

The correlation between EBIT and BSVO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

EBIT vs. BSVO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EBIT	BSVO
Financial Services	25.5%	32.3%
Consumer Cyclical	14.4%	14.3%
Industrials	13.3%	13.8%
Energy	11.7%	15.8%
Technology	7.7%	4.9%
Real Estate	7.2%	0.6%
Healthcare	4.2%	3.6%
Communication Services	3.7%	3.9%
Basic Materials	3.6%	6.0%
Utilities	3.4%	-
Consumer Defensive	3.2%	4.8%

Return for Risk

EBIT vs. BSVO — Risk / Return Rank

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

EBIT

EBIT Risk / Return Rank: 52
EBIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
EBIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
EBIT Omega Ratio Rank: 45
EBIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
EBIT Martin Ratio Rank: 54

BSVO

BSVO Risk / Return Rank: 72
BSVO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
BSVO Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
BSVO Omega Ratio Rank: 63
BSVO Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
BSVO Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

EBIT vs. BSVO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Harbor AlphaEdge Small Cap Earners ETF (EBIT) and EA Bridgeway Omni Small-Cap Value ETF (BSVO). 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.

	EBIT	BSVO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.57	2.21	-0.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.37	3.14	-0.77
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.38	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.21	4.99	-1.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.20	14.22	-5.03
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EBIT vs. BSVO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EBIT Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is comparable to the BSVO Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EBIT and BSVO, 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

	EBIT	BSVO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.57	2.21	-0.64
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.70	0.78	-0.08

Drawdowns

EBIT vs. BSVO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EBIT drawdown since its inception was -26.64%, smaller than the maximum BSVO drawdown of -28.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EBIT and BSVO.

Drawdown Indicators

	EBIT	BSVO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.64%	-28.67%	+2.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.34%	-8.31%	-0.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-28.67%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.34%	-1.86%	+0.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.55%	-5.73%	-0.82%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.90%	2.91%	-0.01%

Volatility

EBIT vs. BSVO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Harbor AlphaEdge Small Cap Earners ETF (EBIT) is 3.99%, while EA Bridgeway Omni Small-Cap Value ETF (BSVO) has a volatility of 4.77%. This indicates that EBIT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BSVO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EBIT	BSVO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.99%	4.77%	-0.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.71%	11.95%	-1.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.13%	18.88%	-1.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.24%	21.72%	-0.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.24%	21.72%	-0.48%

EBIT vs. BSVO - Expense Ratio Comparison

EBIT has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than BSVO's 0.47% expense ratio.

Dividends

EBIT vs. BSVO - Dividend Comparison

EBIT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.78%, more than BSVO's 1.29% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BSVO EA Bridgeway Omni Small-Cap Value ETF	1.29%	1.52%	1.61%	1.43%
EBIT Harbor AlphaEdge Small Cap Earners ETF	1.78%	2.00%	2.40%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EBIT and BSVO in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.97, EBIT and BSVO move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, EBIT or BSVO?

BSVO has higher volatility (4.77%) compared to EBIT (3.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EBIT dropped -26.64% vs BSVO's -28.67%.

Which ETF is better, EBIT or BSVO?

On 1-year performance, BSVO leads with 41.30% vs 26.62% for EBIT. On fees, EBIT is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, EBIT has been the lower-risk option at 3.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EBIT or BSVO?

Over the 1-year period, BSVO has performed better with a 41.30% return vs 26.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EBIT or BSVO?

EBIT is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.47% for BSVO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EBIT or BSVO?

EBIT has the higher dividend yield at 1.78%, compared with 1.29% for BSVO.

What is the main difference between EBIT and BSVO?

They also come from different issuers: Harbor and Bridgeway. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for EBIT and 0.47% for BSVO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BSVO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 vs 1.57), 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.