PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GTTMX vs. BBVSX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GTTMX vs. BBVSX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Total Market Equity Portfolio (GTTMX) and Bridge Builder Small/Mid Cap Value Fund (BBVSX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GTTMX achieves a 13.29% return, which is significantly higher than BBVSX's 12.39% return. Over the past 10 years, GTTMX has outperformed BBVSX with an annualized return of 12.36%, while BBVSX has yielded a comparatively lower 9.06% annualized return.


GTTMX

1D
0.49%
1M
5.06%
YTD
13.29%
6M
15.08%
1Y
29.10%
3Y*
18.10%
5Y*
10.23%
10Y*
12.36%

BBVSX

1D
1.10%
1M
2.50%
YTD
12.39%
6M
0.13%
1Y
11.75%
3Y*
11.49%
5Y*
5.44%
10Y*
9.06%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GTTMX vs. BBVSX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
GTTMX
Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Total Market Equity Portfolio
13.29%18.40%14.84%9.39%-13.90%41.28%5.12%24.18%-11.99%22.88%
BBVSX
Bridge Builder Small/Mid Cap Value Fund
12.39%-2.25%10.61%15.05%-9.75%28.14%6.07%28.04%-14.47%12.65%

Correlation

The correlation between GTTMX and BBVSX is 0.79, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.79

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.84

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.89

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.91

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 30, 2015

0.91

The correlation between GTTMX and BBVSX shifts across timeframes, from 0.79 (1 year) to 0.91 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

GTTMX vs. BBVSX — Risk / Return Rank

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

GTTMX
GTTMX Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
GTTMX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GTTMX Sortino Ratio Rank: 4444
Sortino Ratio Rank
GTTMX Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
GTTMX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
GTTMX Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank

BBVSX
BBVSX Risk / Return Rank: 1010
Overall Rank
BBVSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1010
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BBVSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
Sortino Ratio Rank
BBVSX Omega Ratio Rank: 1111
Omega Ratio Rank
BBVSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 1111
Calmar Ratio Rank
BBVSX Martin Ratio Rank: 99
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

GTTMX vs. BBVSX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Total Market Equity Portfolio (GTTMX) and Bridge Builder Small/Mid Cap Value Fund (BBVSX). 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.


GTTMXBBVSXDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.04

0.78

+1.26

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.81

1.11

+1.70

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.16

+0.18

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

4.64

1.04

+3.60

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

15.63

2.58

+13.05

GTTMX vs. BBVSX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GTTMX Sharpe Ratio is 2.04, which is higher than the BBVSX Sharpe Ratio of 0.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GTTMX and BBVSX, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


GTTMXBBVSXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.04

0.78

+1.26

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.56

0.28

+0.28

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

0.43

+0.17

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.42

0.38

+0.03

Drawdowns

GTTMX vs. BBVSX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GTTMX drawdown since its inception was -56.24%, which is greater than BBVSX's maximum drawdown of -43.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GTTMX and BBVSX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GTTMXBBVSXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-56.24%

-43.42%

-12.82%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.51%

-13.05%

+6.54%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.62%

-23.25%

+2.63%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.12%

-23.25%

-0.87%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-44.59%

-43.42%

-1.17%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-2.13%

+2.13%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.25%

-6.18%

-4.07%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.92%

5.19%

-3.27%

Volatility

GTTMX vs. BBVSX - Volatility Comparison

Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Total Market Equity Portfolio (GTTMX) and Bridge Builder Small/Mid Cap Value Fund (BBVSX) have volatilities of 3.96% and 4.07%, 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GTTMXBBVSXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.96%

4.07%

-0.11%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.84%

14.29%

-3.45%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.84%

17.44%

-2.60%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.32%

19.33%

-1.01%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.50%

21.01%

-0.51%

GTTMX vs. BBVSX - Expense Ratio Comparison

GTTMX has a 1.83% expense ratio, which is higher than BBVSX's 0.41% expense ratio.


Dividends

GTTMX vs. BBVSX - Dividend Comparison

GTTMX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 16.64%, while BBVSX has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BBVSX
Bridge Builder Small/Mid Cap Value Fund
0.00%0.00%6.75%3.88%7.57%10.92%2.38%1.32%5.03%1.18%0.82%0.68%
GTTMX
Glenmede Quantitative U.S. Total Market Equity Portfolio
16.64%18.85%14.45%5.83%0.40%17.50%11.58%5.95%9.88%3.00%0.55%0.59%

Frequently Asked Questions


GTTMX and BBVSX have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BBVSX has higher volatility (4.07%) compared to GTTMX (3.96%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GTTMX dropped -56.24% vs BBVSX's -43.42%.

GTTMX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 vs 0.78), 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 GTTMX and BBVSX

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