MGMT vs. LSAF

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

MGMT (Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF) and LSAF (LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. MGMT is actively managed, while LSAF is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MGMT returned 7.58%/yr vs 10.90%/yr for LSAF. Their correlation of 0.83 means they have usually moved in the same direction. MGMT charges 1.10%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for LSAF.

Performance

MGMT vs. LSAF - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MGMT achieves a 14.50% return, which is significantly lower than LSAF's 19.96% return.

MGMT

• 1D: 0.97%
• 1M: 1.76%
• 6M: 7.02%
• YTD: 14.50%
• 1Y: 27.64%
• 3Y*: 12.00%
• 5Y*: 7.58%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.72%

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

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
LSAF LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF	$265.84K	$205.64K	$201.86K
MGMT Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF	$435.05K	$549.29K	$510.44K

MGMT vs. LSAF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
MGMT Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF	14.50%	6.96%	12.95%	17.87%	-14.54%	40.77%	5.49%
LSAF LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF	19.96%	12.01%	18.09%	15.48%	-13.12%	22.75%	2.84%

Correlation

The correlation between MGMT and LSAF is 0.75, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.75
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.81
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 3, 2020	0.83

The correlation between MGMT and LSAF shifts across timeframes, from 0.75 (1 year) to 0.85 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

MGMT vs. LSAF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MGMT	LSAF
Industrials	23.7%	10.7%
Technology	16.6%	15.4%
Financial Services	12.5%	16.2%
Energy	12.5%	3.3%
Basic Materials	11.5%	5.8%
Consumer Cyclical	8.8%	19.9%
Healthcare	6.1%	7.8%
Communication Services	3.4%	4.7%
Consumer Defensive	3.3%	4.1%
Real Estate	1.7%	2.1%
Utilities	-	0.9%

Return for Risk

MGMT vs. LSAF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

MGMT

MGMT Risk / Return Rank: 59
MGMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
MGMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
MGMT Omega Ratio Rank: 57
MGMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
MGMT Martin Ratio Rank: 53

LSAF

LSAF Risk / Return Rank: 88
LSAF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
LSAF Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
LSAF Omega Ratio Rank: 82
LSAF Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
LSAF Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

MGMT vs. LSAF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF (MGMT) 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.

	MGMT	LSAF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.47	2.03	-0.56
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.19	2.98	-0.79
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.35	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.05	4.41	-2.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.25	14.86	-8.61

MGMT vs. LSAF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MGMT Sharpe Ratio is 1.47, which is comparable to the LSAF Sharpe Ratio of 2.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MGMT 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.

Drawdowns

MGMT vs. LSAF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MGMT drawdown since its inception was -24.95%, smaller than the maximum LSAF drawdown of -41.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MGMT and LSAF.

Drawdown Indicators

	MGMT	LSAF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.95%	-41.67%	+16.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.32%	-6.58%	-5.74%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.76%	-20.26%	-3.50%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.95%	-24.94%	-0.01%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.78%	-1.48%	+0.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.58%	-6.21%	-0.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.03%	1.95%	+2.08%

Volatility

MGMT vs. LSAF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF (MGMT) is 3.66%, while LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF (LSAF) has a volatility of 4.21%. This indicates that MGMT 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.

Volatility by Period

	MGMT	LSAF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.66%	4.21%	-0.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.47%	10.49%	+0.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.17%	14.36%	+2.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.44%	18.38%	+1.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.44%	21.73%	-2.29%

MGMT vs. LSAF - Expense Ratio Comparison

MGMT has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is higher than LSAF's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

MGMT vs. LSAF - Dividend Comparison

MGMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.30%, less than LSAF's 0.57% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
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%
MGMT Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF	0.30%	0.34%	0.51%	1.16%	0.90%	0.26%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MGMT and LSAF in my portfolio?

MGMT and LSAF have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MGMT or LSAF?

LSAF has higher volatility (4.21%) compared to MGMT (3.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MGMT dropped -24.95% vs LSAF's -41.67%.

Which ETF is better, MGMT or LSAF?

On 5-year performance, LSAF leads with 10.90% vs 7.58% for MGMT. On fees, LSAF is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, MGMT has been the lower-risk option at 3.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MGMT or LSAF?

Over the 5-year period, LSAF has performed better with a 10.90% return vs 7.58%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MGMT or LSAF?

LSAF is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for MGMT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MGMT or LSAF?

LSAF has the higher dividend yield at 0.57%, compared with 0.30% for MGMT.

What is the main difference between MGMT and LSAF?

They also come from different issuers: Ballast and Redwood. Their fees differ too: 1.10% for MGMT and 0.75% for LSAF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LSAF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 1.47), 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.