FMCX vs. BBUS

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FMCX (FMC Excelsior Focus Equity ETF) and BBUS (JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. FMCX is actively managed, while BBUS is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, FMCX returned 15.33%/yr vs 20.70%/yr for BBUS. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FMCX charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.02%/yr for BBUS.

Performance

FMCX vs. BBUS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FMC Excelsior Focus Equity ETF (FMCX) and JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Equity ETF (BBUS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FMCX achieves a 5.40% return, which is significantly lower than BBUS's 7.57% return.

FMCX

• 1D: -1.48%
• 1M: -1.06%
• YTD: 5.40%
• 6M: 4.63%
• 1Y: 13.48%
• 3Y*: 15.33%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BBUS

• 1D: -1.68%
• 1M: -1.53%
• YTD: 7.57%
• 6M: 6.62%
• 1Y: 22.78%
• 3Y*: 20.70%
• 5Y*: 12.52%
• 10Y*: —

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

FMCX vs. BBUS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
FMCX FMC Excelsior Focus Equity ETF	5.40%	11.31%	19.10%	21.94%	-11.16%
BBUS JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Equity ETF	7.57%	17.77%	24.89%	27.20%	-9.69%

Correlation

The correlation between FMCX and BBUS is 0.89, 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	0.89
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.89
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 25, 2022	0.90

The correlation between FMCX and BBUS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

FMCX vs. BBUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FMCX	BBUS
Technology	31.2%	38.1%
Industrials	21.3%	7.4%
Consumer Cyclical	15.5%	9.1%
Financial Services	13.6%	11.2%
Healthcare	9.3%	8.0%
Communication Services	5.3%	10.0%
Basic Materials	3.8%	1.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	4.4%
Energy	-	3.0%
Real Estate	-	1.7%
Utilities	-	2.6%

Return for Risk

FMCX vs. BBUS — Risk / Return Rank

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

FMCX

FMCX Risk / Return Rank: 28
FMCX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
FMCX Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
FMCX Omega Ratio Rank: 28
FMCX Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
FMCX Martin Ratio Rank: 28

BBUS

BBUS Risk / Return Rank: 56
BBUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
BBUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
BBUS Omega Ratio Rank: 55
BBUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
BBUS Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

FMCX vs. BBUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FMC Excelsior Focus Equity ETF (FMCX) and JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Equity ETF (BBUS). 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.

	FMCX	BBUS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.02	1.82	-0.81
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.53	2.48	-0.95
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.33	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.08	2.49	-1.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.73	10.97	-7.24

FMCX vs. BBUS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FMCX Sharpe Ratio is 1.02, which is lower than the BBUS Sharpe Ratio of 1.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FMCX and BBUS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FMCX vs. BBUS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FMCX drawdown since its inception was -17.70%, smaller than the maximum BBUS drawdown of -35.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMCX and BBUS.

Drawdown Indicators

	FMCX	BBUS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.70%	-35.35%	+17.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.59%	-9.21%	-3.38%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.70%	-19.01%	+1.31%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-25.46%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.20%	-3.47%	+1.27%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.26%	-5.43%	+1.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.62%	2.08%	+1.54%

Volatility

FMCX vs. BBUS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FMC Excelsior Focus Equity ETF (FMCX) is 4.29%, while JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Equity ETF (BBUS) has a volatility of 5.00%. This indicates that FMCX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BBUS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FMCX	BBUS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.29%	5.00%	-0.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.03%	9.95%	+1.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.40%	12.59%	+0.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.25%	17.14%	-0.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.25%	19.59%	-3.34%

FMCX vs. BBUS - Expense Ratio Comparison

FMCX has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is higher than BBUS's 0.02% expense ratio.

Dividends

FMCX vs. BBUS - Dividend Comparison

FMCX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.33%, less than BBUS's 1.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
BBUS JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Equity ETF	1.01%	1.07%	1.21%	1.38%	1.57%	1.11%	1.43%	1.37%
FMCX FMC Excelsior Focus Equity ETF	0.33%	0.35%	2.12%	1.34%	1.19%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FMCX and BBUS in my portfolio?

FMCX and BBUS have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FMCX or BBUS?

BBUS has higher volatility (5.00%) compared to FMCX (4.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FMCX dropped -17.70% vs BBUS's -35.35%.

Which ETF is better, FMCX or BBUS?

On 3-year performance, BBUS leads with 20.70% vs 15.33% for FMCX. On fees, BBUS is cheaper at 0.02% per year. On volatility, FMCX has been the lower-risk option at 4.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FMCX or BBUS?

Over the 3-year period, BBUS has performed better with a 20.70% return vs 15.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FMCX or BBUS?

BBUS is cheaper with a 0.02% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for FMCX.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FMCX or BBUS?

BBUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.01%, compared with 0.33% for FMCX.

What is the main difference between FMCX and BBUS?

They also come from different issuers: First Manhattan and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for FMCX and 0.02% for BBUS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BBUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.82 vs 1.02), 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.