OMFS vs. BSMC
OMFS (Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF) and BSMC (Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF) are both Small Cap Value Equities funds. OMFS is passively managed, while BSMC is actively managed. Over the past year, OMFS returned 28.51% vs 24.26% for BSMC. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. OMFS charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for BSMC.
Performance
OMFS vs. BSMC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, OMFS achieves a 13.70% return, which is significantly higher than BSMC's 9.25% return.
OMFS
- 1D
- -0.77%
- 1M
- 1.99%
- YTD
- 13.70%
- 6M
- 12.83%
- 1Y
- 28.51%
- 3Y*
- 14.17%
- 5Y*
- 5.57%
- 10Y*
- —
BSMC
- 1D
- -0.46%
- 1M
- 0.43%
- YTD
- 9.25%
- 6M
- 9.99%
- 1Y
- 24.26%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
OMFS vs. BSMC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
OMFS Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF | 13.70% | 13.34% | 3.98% | 17.05% |
BSMC Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF | 9.25% | 15.52% | 10.21% | 11.69% |
Correlation
The correlation between OMFS and BSMC is 0.80, 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 | 0.80 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 6, 2023 | 0.84 |
The correlation between OMFS and BSMC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.
OMFS vs. BSMC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
OMFS
BSMC
Financial Services
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Real Estate
-
Consumer Cyclical
Energy
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Utilities
-
Communication Services
Financial Services
OMFS
BSMC
Industrials
OMFS
BSMC
Technology
OMFS
BSMC
Healthcare
OMFS
BSMC
Real Estate
OMFS
BSMC
-
Consumer Cyclical
OMFS
BSMC
Energy
OMFS
BSMC
Consumer Defensive
OMFS
BSMC
Basic Materials
OMFS
BSMC
Utilities
OMFS
BSMC
-
Communication Services
OMFS
BSMC
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
OMFS vs. BSMC — Risk / Return Rank
OMFS
BSMC
OMFS vs. BSMC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) and Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF (BSMC). 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.
| OMFS | BSMC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.06 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.09 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.29 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.05 | 2.70 | +0.35 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.48 | 9.57 | +0.91 |
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
| OMFS | BSMC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.62 | 1.68 | -0.06 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.26 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.41 | 1.13 | -0.71 |
Drawdowns
OMFS vs. BSMC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum OMFS drawdown since its inception was -42.50%, which is greater than BSMC's maximum drawdown of -19.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OMFS and BSMC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| OMFS | BSMC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -42.50% | -19.15% | -23.35% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.38% | -9.02% | -0.36% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -22.35% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.22% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.92% | -1.95% | +0.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.49% | -2.68% | -7.81% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.73% | 2.54% | +0.19% |
Volatility
OMFS vs. BSMC - Volatility Comparison
Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) has a higher volatility of 4.97% compared to Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF (BSMC) at 3.97%. This indicates that OMFS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BSMC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| OMFS | BSMC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.97% | 3.97% | +1.00% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.44% | 10.06% | +2.38% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.64% | 14.52% | +3.12% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 21.46% | 16.09% | +5.37% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 24.31% | 16.09% | +8.22% |
OMFS vs. BSMC - Expense Ratio Comparison
OMFS has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than BSMC's 0.70% expense ratio.
Dividends
OMFS vs. BSMC - Dividend Comparison
OMFS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%, less than BSMC's 0.95% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BSMC Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF | 0.95% | 1.17% | 1.02% | 0.15% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
OMFS Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF | 0.91% | 0.80% | 1.87% | 1.27% | 1.84% | 0.66% | 1.07% | 1.29% | 1.50% | 0.34% |
Frequently Asked Questions
OMFS and BSMC have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
OMFS has higher volatility (4.97%) compared to BSMC (3.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OMFS dropped -42.50% vs BSMC's -19.15%.
On 1-year performance, OMFS leads with 28.51% vs 24.26% for BSMC. On fees, OMFS is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, BSMC has been the lower-risk option at 3.97%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, OMFS has performed better with a 28.51% return vs 24.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
OMFS is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for BSMC.
BSMC has the higher dividend yield at 0.95%, compared with 0.91% for OMFS.
They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Brandes. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for OMFS and 0.70% for BSMC.
BSMC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.68 vs 1.62), 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.
Find the right allocation for OMFS and BSMC
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