LCF vs. BBUS

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

LCF (Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF) and BBUS (JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. LCF is actively managed, while BBUS is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, LCF returned 15.56%/yr vs 20.70%/yr for BBUS. With a 0.95 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. LCF charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.02%/yr for BBUS.

Performance

LCF vs. BBUS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF (LCF) 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, LCF achieves a 0.88% return, which is significantly lower than BBUS's 7.57% return.

LCF

• 1D: -0.58%
• 1M: -3.25%
• YTD: 0.88%
• 6M: 0.24%
• 1Y: 14.62%
• 3Y*: 15.56%
• 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)

LCF vs. BBUS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
LCF Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF	0.88%	17.20%	20.71%	26.20%	-4.72%
BBUS JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Equity ETF	7.57%	17.77%	24.89%	27.20%	-5.19%

Correlation

The correlation between LCF and BBUS is 0.94, 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	0.94
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 29, 2022	0.95

The correlation between LCF and BBUS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

LCF vs. BBUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	LCF	BBUS
Technology	32.9%	38.1%
Communication Services	16.9%	10.0%
Financial Services	15.4%	11.2%
Healthcare	10.8%	8.0%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	9.1%
Industrials	5.3%	7.4%
Consumer Defensive	3.6%	4.4%
Energy	2.0%	3.0%
Real Estate	1.5%	1.7%
Basic Materials	0.5%	1.2%
Utilities	-	2.6%

Return for Risk

LCF vs. BBUS — Risk / Return Rank

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

LCF

LCF Risk / Return Rank: 33
LCF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
LCF Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
LCF Omega Ratio Rank: 34
LCF Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
LCF Martin Ratio Rank: 36

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.

LCF vs. BBUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF (LCF) 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.

	LCF	BBUS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.18	1.82	-0.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.68	2.48	-0.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.33	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.26	2.49	-1.23
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.04	10.97	-5.93

LCF vs. BBUS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCF Sharpe Ratio is 1.18, which is lower than the BBUS Sharpe Ratio of 1.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCF 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

LCF vs. BBUS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCF drawdown since its inception was -18.28%, smaller than the maximum BBUS drawdown of -35.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCF and BBUS.

Drawdown Indicators

	LCF	BBUS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.28%	-35.35%	+17.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.67%	-9.21%	-2.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.28%	-19.01%	+0.73%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-25.46%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.54%	-3.47%	-1.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.82%	-5.43%	+2.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.91%	2.08%	+0.83%

Volatility

LCF vs. BBUS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF (LCF) is 4.45%, while JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Equity ETF (BBUS) has a volatility of 5.00%. This indicates that LCF 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

	LCF	BBUS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.45%	5.00%	-0.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.85%	9.95%	-0.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.42%	12.59%	-0.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.51%	17.14%	-1.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.51%	19.59%	-4.08%

LCF vs. BBUS - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

LCF vs. BBUS - Dividend Comparison

LCF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.54%, 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%
LCF Touchstone US Large Cap Focused ETF	0.54%	0.55%	0.63%	0.71%	0.24%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LCF and BBUS in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, LCF and BBUS move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, LCF or BBUS?

BBUS has higher volatility (5.00%) compared to LCF (4.45%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCF dropped -18.28% vs BBUS's -35.35%.

Which ETF is better, LCF or BBUS?

On 3-year performance, BBUS leads with 20.70% vs 15.56% for LCF. On fees, BBUS is cheaper at 0.02% per year. On volatility, LCF has been the lower-risk option at 4.45%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LCF or BBUS?

Over the 3-year period, BBUS has performed better with a 20.70% return vs 15.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LCF or BBUS?

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

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

BBUS has the higher dividend yield at 1.01%, compared with 0.54% for LCF.

What is the main difference between LCF and BBUS?

They also come from different issuers: Touchstone and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for LCF and 0.02% for BBUS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BBUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.82 vs 1.18), 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.