MMLG vs. BBHL
MMLG (First Trust Multi-Manager Large Growth ETF) and BBHL (BBH Select Large Cap ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. MMLG is actively managed, while BBHL is passively managed. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MMLG charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.71%/yr for BBHL.
Performance
MMLG vs. BBHL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MMLG achieves a 4.76% return, which is significantly lower than BBHL's 5.40% return.
MMLG
- 1D
- -1.42%
- 1M
- 4.92%
- YTD
- 4.76%
- 6M
- 4.14%
- 1Y
- 16.13%
- 3Y*
- 21.41%
- 5Y*
- 8.34%
- 10Y*
- —
BBHL
- 1D
- -0.38%
- 1M
- 3.91%
- YTD
- 5.40%
- 6M
- 5.12%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MMLG vs. BBHL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MMLG First Trust Multi-Manager Large Growth ETF | 4.76% | 2.11% |
BBHL BBH Select Large Cap ETF | 5.40% | 2.72% |
Correlation
The correlation between MMLG and BBHL is 0.79, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 18, 2025 | 0.79 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
MMLG vs. BBHL — Risk / Return Rank
MMLG
BBHL
MMLG vs. BBHL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Multi-Manager Large Growth ETF (MMLG) and BBH Select Large Cap ETF (BBHL). 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.
| MMLG | BBHL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.81 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.34 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MMLG | BBHL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.89 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.34 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.46 | 1.26 | -0.80 |
Drawdowns
MMLG vs. BBHL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MMLG drawdown since its inception was -45.97%, which is greater than BBHL's maximum drawdown of -11.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MMLG and BBHL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MMLG | BBHL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -45.97% | -11.99% | -33.98% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.89% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -26.57% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -45.97% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.17% | -0.53% | -1.64% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -14.36% | -3.01% | -11.35% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.91% | — | — |
Volatility
MMLG vs. BBHL - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MMLG | BBHL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.37% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.03% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.22% | 12.70% | +5.52% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 24.94% | 12.70% | +12.24% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.54% | 12.70% | +11.84% |
MMLG vs. BBHL - Expense Ratio Comparison
MMLG has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than BBHL's 0.71% expense ratio.
Dividends
MMLG vs. BBHL - Dividend Comparison
Neither MMLG nor BBHL has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BBHL BBH Select Large Cap ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MMLG First Trust Multi-Manager Large Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.25% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MMLG and BBHL have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BBHL is cheaper at 0.71% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BBHL is cheaper with a 0.71% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for MMLG.
MMLG and BBHL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: First Trust and BBH. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for MMLG and 0.71% for BBHL.
Find the right allocation for MMLG and BBHL
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