MGMT vs. XJH

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

MGMT (Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF) and XJH (iShares ESG Screened S&P Mid-Cap ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. MGMT is actively managed, while XJH is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MGMT returned 7.20%/yr vs 7.66%/yr for XJH. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MGMT charges 1.10%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for XJH.

Performance

MGMT vs. XJH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF (MGMT) and iShares ESG Screened S&P Mid-Cap ETF (XJH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MGMT achieves a 11.12% return, which is significantly lower than XJH's 14.21% return.

MGMT

• 1D: 1.21%
• 1M: 1.18%
• YTD: 11.12%
• 6M: 10.84%
• 1Y: 28.05%
• 3Y*: 14.69%
• 5Y*: 7.20%
• 10Y*: —

XJH

• 1D: 0.28%
• 1M: 3.31%
• YTD: 14.21%
• 6M: 14.31%
• 1Y: 26.63%
• 3Y*: 16.29%
• 5Y*: 7.66%
• 10Y*: —

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

MGMT vs. XJH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
MGMT Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF	11.12%	6.96%	12.95%	17.87%	-14.54%	40.77%	5.36%
XJH iShares ESG Screened S&P Mid-Cap ETF	14.21%	8.12%	12.27%	16.74%	-14.36%	23.43%	5.10%

Correlation

The correlation between MGMT and XJH is 0.83, 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	0.83
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.87
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 4, 2020	0.90

The correlation between MGMT and XJH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

MGMT vs. XJH - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MGMT	XJH
Industrials	23.1%	25.9%
Energy	15.7%	2.9%
Technology	13.6%	16.0%
Basic Materials	13.4%	4.9%
Financial Services	11.1%	14.8%
Consumer Cyclical	8.0%	11.3%
Healthcare	6.2%	9.6%
Consumer Defensive	3.5%	3.8%
Communication Services	3.5%	1.1%
Real Estate	1.8%	8.2%
Utilities	-	1.6%

Return for Risk

MGMT vs. XJH — Risk / Return Rank

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

MGMT

MGMT Risk / Return Rank: 46
MGMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
MGMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
MGMT Omega Ratio Rank: 43
MGMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
MGMT Martin Ratio Rank: 43

XJH

XJH Risk / Return Rank: 52
XJH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
XJH Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
XJH Omega Ratio Rank: 46
XJH Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
XJH Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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.

MGMT vs. XJH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF (MGMT) and iShares ESG Screened S&P Mid-Cap ETF (XJH). 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.

	MGMT	XJH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.61	1.65	-0.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.37	2.41	-0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.28	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.29	2.78	-0.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.94	10.25	-3.31
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MGMT vs. XJH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MGMT Sharpe Ratio is 1.61, which is comparable to the XJH Sharpe Ratio of 1.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MGMT and XJH, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MGMT	XJH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.61	1.65	-0.04
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.37	0.39	-0.02
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.69	0.76	-0.07

Drawdowns

MGMT vs. XJH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MGMT drawdown since its inception was -24.95%, roughly equal to the maximum XJH drawdown of -25.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MGMT and XJH.

Drawdown Indicators

	MGMT	XJH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.95%	-25.07%	+0.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.32%	-9.61%	-2.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.76%	-24.56%	+0.80%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.95%	-25.07%	+0.12%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.54%	0.00%	-1.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.74%	-6.82%	+0.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.05%	2.61%	+1.44%

Volatility

MGMT vs. XJH - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF (MGMT) is 4.17%, while iShares ESG Screened S&P Mid-Cap ETF (XJH) has a volatility of 4.44%. This indicates that MGMT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XJH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MGMT	XJH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.17%	4.44%	-0.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.96%	11.89%	+0.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.50%	16.25%	+1.25%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.54%	19.92%	-0.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.57%	19.87%	-0.30%

MGMT vs. XJH - Expense Ratio Comparison

MGMT has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is higher than XJH's 0.12% expense ratio.

Dividends

MGMT vs. XJH - Dividend Comparison

MGMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.31%, less than XJH's 1.10% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
MGMT Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF	0.31%	0.34%	0.51%	1.16%	0.90%	0.26%	0.00%
XJH iShares ESG Screened S&P Mid-Cap ETF	1.10%	1.24%	1.24%	1.38%	1.45%	1.04%	0.36%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MGMT and XJH in my portfolio?

MGMT and XJH have a correlation of 0.83, 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 XJH?

XJH has higher volatility (4.44%) compared to MGMT (4.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MGMT dropped -24.95% vs XJH's -25.07%.

Which ETF is better, MGMT or XJH?

On 5-year performance, XJH leads with 7.66% vs 7.20% for MGMT. On fees, XJH is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, MGMT has been the lower-risk option at 4.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MGMT or XJH?

Over the 5-year period, XJH has performed better with a 7.66% return vs 7.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MGMT or XJH?

XJH is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for MGMT.

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

XJH has the higher dividend yield at 1.10%, compared with 0.31% for MGMT.

What is the main difference between MGMT and XJH?

They also come from different issuers: Inverdale Capital Management LLC and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.10% for MGMT and 0.12% for XJH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XJH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.65 vs 1.61), 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.