IMOM vs. BRNY

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IMOM (Alpha Architect International Quantitative Momentum ETF) and BRNY (Burney U.S. Factor Rotation ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IMOM is a Momentum fund tracking the Alpha Architect Intern.Quan. Mome. (USD)(TR), while BRNY is a fund fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. IMOM is passively managed, while BRNY is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, IMOM returned 23.30%/yr vs 27.59%/yr for BRNY. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IMOM charges 0.38%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for BRNY.

Performance

IMOM vs. BRNY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Alpha Architect International Quantitative Momentum ETF (IMOM) and Burney U.S. Factor Rotation ETF (BRNY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with IMOM having a 13.79% return and BRNY slightly higher at 14.17%.

IMOM

• 1D: -2.92%
• 1M: -3.30%
• YTD: 13.79%
• 6M: 13.08%
• 1Y: 36.25%
• 3Y*: 23.30%
• 5Y*: 8.09%
• 10Y*: 7.38%

BRNY

• 1D: -1.88%
• 1M: 3.00%
• YTD: 14.17%
• 6M: 12.91%
• 1Y: 31.23%
• 3Y*: 27.59%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IMOM vs. BRNY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
IMOM Alpha Architect International Quantitative Momentum ETF	13.79%	47.20%	5.22%	9.15%	12.04%
BRNY Burney U.S. Factor Rotation ETF	14.17%	22.02%	28.84%	22.36%	5.16%

Correlation

The correlation between IMOM and BRNY is 0.61, 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	0.61
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2022	0.63

The correlation between IMOM and BRNY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

IMOM vs. BRNY — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMOM

IMOM Risk / Return Rank: 53
IMOM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
IMOM Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
IMOM Omega Ratio Rank: 55
IMOM Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
IMOM Martin Ratio Rank: 56

BRNY

BRNY Risk / Return Rank: 70
BRNY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
BRNY Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
BRNY Omega Ratio Rank: 68
BRNY Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
BRNY Martin Ratio Rank: 74

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.

IMOM vs. BRNY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Alpha Architect International Quantitative Momentum ETF (IMOM) and Burney U.S. Factor Rotation ETF (BRNY). 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.

	IMOM	BRNY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.76	2.12	-0.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.40	2.90	-0.50
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.38	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.33	3.36	-1.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.33	12.92	-3.59

IMOM vs. BRNY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMOM Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is comparable to the BRNY Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMOM and BRNY, 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

IMOM vs. BRNY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMOM drawdown since its inception was -45.74%, which is greater than BRNY's maximum drawdown of -19.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMOM and BRNY.

Drawdown Indicators

	IMOM	BRNY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-45.74%	-19.14%	-26.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.61%	-9.34%	-6.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.51%	-19.14%	+1.63%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-39.27%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-45.74%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.97%	-1.88%	-4.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.13%	-2.76%	-11.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.90%	2.42%	+1.48%

Volatility

IMOM vs. BRNY - Volatility Comparison

Alpha Architect International Quantitative Momentum ETF (IMOM) has a higher volatility of 8.35% compared to Burney U.S. Factor Rotation ETF (BRNY) at 6.98%. This indicates that IMOM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BRNY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IMOM	BRNY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.35%	6.98%	+1.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.24%	11.95%	+6.29%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.70%	14.86%	+5.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.07%	17.24%	+2.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.28%	17.24%	+3.04%

IMOM vs. BRNY - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMOM has a 0.38% expense ratio, which is lower than BRNY's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

IMOM vs. BRNY - Dividend Comparison

IMOM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.22%, more than BRNY's 0.20% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
BRNY Burney U.S. Factor Rotation ETF	0.20%	0.30%	0.23%	0.68%	0.22%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IMOM Alpha Architect International Quantitative Momentum ETF	2.22%	2.53%	4.52%	2.95%	6.06%	1.27%	0.59%	1.17%	0.78%	1.11%	0.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IMOM and BRNY in my portfolio?

IMOM and BRNY have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IMOM or BRNY?

IMOM has higher volatility (8.35%) compared to BRNY (6.98%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMOM dropped -45.74% vs BRNY's -19.14%.

Which ETF is better, IMOM or BRNY?

On 3-year performance, BRNY leads with 27.59% vs 23.30% for IMOM. On fees, IMOM is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, BRNY has been the lower-risk option at 6.98%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IMOM or BRNY?

Over the 3-year period, BRNY has performed better with a 27.59% return vs 23.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IMOM or BRNY?

IMOM is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for BRNY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IMOM or BRNY?

IMOM has the higher dividend yield at 2.22%, compared with 0.20% for BRNY.

What is the main difference between IMOM and BRNY?

Their fees differ too: 0.38% for IMOM and 0.79% for BRNY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BRNY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.12 vs 1.76), 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.