ECML vs. BSMC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ECML (EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF) and BSMC (Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF) are both Small Cap Value Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, ECML returned 26.84% vs 24.26% for BSMC. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ECML charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for BSMC.

Performance

ECML vs. BSMC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF (ECML) and Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF (BSMC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ECML achieves a 14.39% return, which is significantly higher than BSMC's 9.25% return.

ECML

• 1D: 0.16%
• 1M: 1.49%
• YTD: 14.39%
• 6M: 14.23%
• 1Y: 26.84%
• 3Y*: 15.57%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BSMC

• 1D: -0.46%
• 1M: 0.43%
• YTD: 9.25%
• 6M: 9.99%
• 1Y: 24.26%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ECML vs. BSMC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ECML EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF	14.39%	6.82%	2.37%	16.98%
BSMC Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF	9.25%	15.52%	10.21%	11.69%

Correlation

The correlation between ECML and BSMC is 0.80, 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	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 6, 2023	0.84

The correlation between ECML and BSMC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

ECML vs. BSMC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ECML	BSMC
Consumer Cyclical	23.8%	6.6%
Healthcare	16.6%	21.3%
Industrials	14.2%	19.1%
Energy	13.2%	7.5%
Consumer Defensive	12.4%	13.0%
Basic Materials	10.6%	3.4%
Technology	5.3%	14.7%
Communication Services	3.9%	3.9%
Utilities	1.4%	-
Financial Services	-	10.4%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

ECML vs. BSMC — Risk / Return Rank

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

ECML

ECML Risk / Return Rank: 61
ECML Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
ECML Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
ECML Omega Ratio Rank: 53
ECML Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
ECML Martin Ratio Rank: 62

BSMC

BSMC Risk / Return Rank: 52
BSMC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
BSMC Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
BSMC Omega Ratio Rank: 47
BSMC Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
BSMC Martin Ratio Rank: 56

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.

ECML vs. BSMC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF (ECML) and Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF (BSMC). 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.

	ECML	BSMC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.86	1.68	+0.17
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.85	2.50	+0.35
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.29	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.85	2.70	+1.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.05	9.57	+1.48
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ECML vs. BSMC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ECML Sharpe Ratio is 1.86, which is comparable to the BSMC Sharpe Ratio of 1.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ECML and BSMC, 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

	ECML	BSMC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.86	1.68	+0.17
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.86	1.13	-0.27

Drawdowns

ECML vs. BSMC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ECML drawdown since its inception was -24.66%, which is greater than BSMC's maximum drawdown of -19.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ECML and BSMC.

Drawdown Indicators

	ECML	BSMC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.66%	-19.15%	-5.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.01%	-9.02%	+2.01%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.66%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.27%	-1.95%	+1.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.88%	-2.68%	-3.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.44%	2.54%	-0.10%

Volatility

ECML vs. BSMC - Volatility Comparison

EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF (ECML) and Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF (BSMC) have volatilities of 3.84% and 3.97%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ECML	BSMC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.84%	3.97%	-0.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.75%	10.06%	-0.31%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.56%	14.52%	+0.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.39%	16.09%	+2.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.39%	16.09%	+2.30%

ECML vs. BSMC - Expense Ratio Comparison

ECML has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than BSMC's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

ECML vs. BSMC - Dividend Comparison

ECML's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.20%, more than BSMC's 0.95% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BSMC Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF	0.95%	1.17%	1.02%	0.15%
ECML EA Series Trust - Euclidean Fundamental Value ETF	1.20%	1.38%	0.98%	0.77%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ECML and BSMC in my portfolio?

ECML and BSMC have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ECML or BSMC?

BSMC has higher volatility (3.97%) compared to ECML (3.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ECML dropped -24.66% vs BSMC's -19.15%.

Which ETF is better, ECML or BSMC?

On 1-year performance, ECML leads with 26.84% vs 24.26% for BSMC. On fees, BSMC is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, ECML has been the lower-risk option at 3.84%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ECML or BSMC?

Over the 1-year period, ECML has performed better with a 26.84% return vs 24.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ECML or BSMC?

BSMC is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for ECML.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ECML or BSMC?

ECML has the higher dividend yield at 1.20%, compared with 0.95% for BSMC.

What is the main difference between ECML and BSMC?

They also come from different issuers: Euclidean and Brandes. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for ECML and 0.70% for BSMC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ECML currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 vs 1.68), 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.