IJK vs. BBHM
IJK (iShares S&P MidCap 400 Growth ETF) and BBHM (BBH Select Mid Cap ETF) are both Mid Cap Growth Equities funds - IJK tracks the S&P MidCap 400 Growth Index while BBHM tracks the Actively Managed. Both are passively managed. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IJK charges 0.17%/yr vs 0.81%/yr for BBHM.
Performance
IJK vs. BBHM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IJK achieves a 19.41% return, which is significantly higher than BBHM's 2.14% return.
IJK
- 1D
- 0.34%
- 1M
- 4.53%
- YTD
- 19.41%
- 6M
- 18.76%
- 1Y
- 30.22%
- 3Y*
- 18.50%
- 5Y*
- 8.64%
- 10Y*
- 11.54%
BBHM
- 1D
- 0.35%
- 1M
- -2.70%
- YTD
- 2.14%
- 6M
- 0.39%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IJK vs. BBHM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IJK iShares S&P MidCap 400 Growth ETF | 19.41% | 4.60% |
BBHM BBH Select Mid Cap ETF | 2.14% | 2.74% |
Correlation
The correlation between IJK and BBHM is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 18, 2025 | 0.81 |
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
IJK vs. BBHM — Risk / Return Rank
IJK
BBHM
IJK vs. BBHM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P MidCap 400 Growth ETF (IJK) and BBH Select Mid Cap ETF (BBHM). 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.
| IJK | BBHM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.06 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.09 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| IJK | BBHM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.79 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.42 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.55 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.37 | 0.54 | -0.17 |
Drawdowns
IJK vs. BBHM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IJK drawdown since its inception was -54.47%, which is greater than BBHM's maximum drawdown of -9.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IJK and BBHM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IJK | BBHM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -54.47% | -9.78% | -44.69% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.92% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -25.63% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.24% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.25% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -4.95% | +4.95% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.80% | -2.72% | -8.08% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.51% | — | — |
Volatility
IJK vs. BBHM - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| IJK | BBHM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.98% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.15% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.00% | 17.40% | -0.40% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.69% | 17.40% | +3.29% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.06% | 17.40% | +3.66% |
IJK vs. BBHM - Expense Ratio Comparison
IJK has a 0.17% expense ratio, which is lower than BBHM's 0.81% expense ratio.
Dividends
IJK vs. BBHM - Dividend Comparison
IJK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.54%, while BBHM has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BBHM BBH Select Mid Cap ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IJK iShares S&P MidCap 400 Growth ETF | 0.54% | 0.66% | 0.79% | 1.13% | 1.08% | 0.50% | 0.70% | 1.09% | 1.13% | 0.93% | 1.15% | 1.12% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IJK and BBHM have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IJK is cheaper at 0.17% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IJK is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.81% for BBHM.
IJK has the higher dividend yield at 0.54%, compared with 0.00% for BBHM.
IJK tracks S&P MidCap 400 Growth Index, while BBHM tracks Actively Managed. They also come from different issuers: iShares and BBH. Their fees differ too: 0.17% for IJK and 0.81% for BBHM.
Find the right allocation for IJK and BBHM
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