PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
IMCB vs. LSAF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

IMCB vs. LSAF

Last updated Aug 2, 2026
Documentation

IMCB (iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF) and LSAF (LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds - IMCB tracks the IMCB-US - Morningstar U.S. Mid Cap Index while LSAF tracks the AlphaFactor US Core Equity Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, IMCB returned 9.14%/yr vs 10.90%/yr for LSAF. Their correlation of 0.92 means they have usually moved in the same direction. IMCB charges 0.04%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for LSAF.

Performance

IMCB vs. LSAF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB) and LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF (LSAF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMCB achieves a 17.87% return, which is significantly lower than LSAF's 19.96% return.

IMCB

1D
-0.25%
1M
-0.01%
6M
14.48%
YTD
17.87%
1Y
23.21%
3Y*
15.79%
5Y*
9.14%
10Y*
11.27%
ALL TIME*
10.39%

LSAF

1D
-0.55%
1M
2.49%
6M
17.23%
YTD
19.96%
1Y
30.03%
3Y*
18.58%
5Y*
10.90%
10Y*
—
ALL TIME*
11.02%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)

IMCB

iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF
$2.94M$3.89M$3.49M

LSAF

LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF
$265.84K$205.64K$201.86K

IMCB vs. LSAF - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
IMCB
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF		17.87%10.25%15.10%16.37%-16.09%22.81%13.35%31.49%-14.13%
LSAF
LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF		19.96%12.01%18.09%15.48%-13.12%22.75%6.92%28.35%-15.47%

Correlation

The correlation between IMCB and LSAF is 0.88, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.88

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.92

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.92

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 2, 2018

0.92

The correlation between IMCB and LSAF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

IMCB vs. LSAF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
IMCB
LSAF

Industrials

18.4%
10.7%

Technology

17.9%
15.4%

Financial Services

14.1%
16.2%

Consumer Cyclical

9.7%
19.9%

Healthcare

8.8%
7.8%

Energy

7.0%
3.3%

Utilities

6.5%
0.9%

Basic Materials

5.5%
5.8%

Consumer Defensive

5.1%
4.1%

Real Estate

4.5%
2.1%

Communication Services

2.4%
4.7%

Industrials

IMCB
18.4%
LSAF
10.7%

Technology

IMCB
17.9%
LSAF
15.4%

Financial Services

IMCB
14.1%
LSAF
16.2%

Consumer Cyclical

IMCB
9.7%
LSAF
19.9%

Healthcare

IMCB
8.8%
LSAF
7.8%

Energy

IMCB
7.0%
LSAF
3.3%

Utilities

IMCB
6.5%
LSAF
0.9%

Basic Materials

IMCB
5.5%
LSAF
5.8%

Consumer Defensive

IMCB
5.1%
LSAF
4.1%

Real Estate

IMCB
4.5%
LSAF
2.1%

Communication Services

IMCB
2.4%
LSAF
4.7%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF

LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF

Often compared with IMCB:
IMCB vs. IMCGIMCB vs. FSMDXIMCB vs. BKMCIMCB vs. SPMDIMCB vs. VOIMCB vs. IJHIMCB vs. ISCB
Often compared with LSAF:
LSAF vs. CSDLSAF vs. LSATLSAF vs. NOIEXLSAF vs. PWCLSAF vs. FTDSLSAF vs. RUNNLSAF vs. IQSM

Return for Risk

IMCB vs. LSAF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.
IMCB
IMCB Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
IMCB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IMCB Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
IMCB Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
IMCB Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
IMCB Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank
LSAF
LSAF Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
LSAF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LSAF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
LSAF Omega Ratio Rank: 8282
Omega Ratio Rank
LSAF Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
LSAF Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

IMCB vs. LSAF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB) and LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF (LSAF). 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.

IMCBLSAFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.65
2.03

-0.38

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.35
2.98

-0.63

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.35

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.68

4.41

-1.74

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.73

14.86

-4.13

IMCB vs. LSAF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMCB Sharpe Ratio is 1.65, which is comparable to the LSAF Sharpe Ratio of 2.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMCB and LSAF, 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...

Drawdowns

IMCB vs. LSAF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMCB drawdown since its inception was -58.80%, which is greater than LSAF's maximum drawdown of -41.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMCB and LSAF.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

IMCBLSAFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.80%

-41.67%

-17.13%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.05%

-6.58%

-1.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.80%

-20.26%

+0.46%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.15%

-24.94%

-0.21%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.99%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.91%

-1.48%

+0.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.68%

-6.21%

-1.47%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.01%

1.95%

+0.06%

Volatility

IMCB vs. LSAF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB) is 2.32%, while LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF (LSAF) has a volatility of 4.21%. This indicates that IMCB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LSAF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

IMCBLSAFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.32%

4.21%

-1.89%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.96%

10.49%

-0.53%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.10%

14.36%

-1.26%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.56%

18.38%

-0.82%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.60%

21.73%

-2.13%

IMCB vs. LSAF - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMCB has a 0.04% expense ratio, which is lower than LSAF's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

IMCB vs. LSAF - Dividend Comparison

IMCB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.21%, more than LSAF's 0.57% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IMCB
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF		1.21%1.42%1.43%1.55%1.70%1.08%1.12%1.32%1.80%1.31%1.79%1.47%
LSAF
LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF		0.57%0.69%0.42%0.84%0.96%0.37%0.53%0.71%0.20%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

IMCB and LSAF have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LSAF has higher volatility (4.21%) compared to IMCB (2.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMCB dropped -58.80% vs LSAF's -41.67%.

On 5-year performance, LSAF leads with 10.90% vs 9.14% for IMCB. On fees, IMCB is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, IMCB has been the lower-risk option at 2.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, LSAF has performed better with a 10.90% return vs 9.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IMCB is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for LSAF.

IMCB has the higher dividend yield at 1.21%, compared with 0.57% for LSAF.

IMCB tracks IMCB-US - Morningstar U.S. Mid Cap Index, while LSAF tracks AlphaFactor US Core Equity Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Redwood. Their fees differ too: 0.04% for IMCB and 0.75% for LSAF.

LSAF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 1.65), 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 IMCB and LSAF

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