RFV vs. BSMC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RFV (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF) and BSMC (Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF) are both Small Cap Value Equities funds. RFV is passively managed, while BSMC is actively managed. Over the past year, RFV returned 25.06% vs 24.26% for BSMC. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. RFV charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for BSMC.

Performance

RFV vs. BSMC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF (RFV) and Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF (BSMC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RFV achieves a 13.04% return, which is significantly higher than BSMC's 9.25% return.

RFV

• 1D: -0.36%
• 1M: 3.75%
• YTD: 13.04%
• 6M: 10.71%
• 1Y: 25.06%
• 3Y*: 16.77%
• 5Y*: 10.00%
• 10Y*: 12.53%

BSMC

• 1D: -0.46%
• 1M: 0.43%
• YTD: 9.25%
• 6M: 9.99%
• 1Y: 24.26%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RFV vs. BSMC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RFV Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF	13.04%	7.66%	5.63%	22.69%
BSMC Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF	9.25%	15.52%	10.21%	11.69%

Correlation

The correlation between RFV and BSMC is 0.81, 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	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 6, 2023	0.87

The correlation between RFV and BSMC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

RFV vs. BSMC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	RFV	BSMC
Consumer Cyclical	24.4%	6.6%
Financial Services	17.5%	10.4%
Energy	12.9%	7.5%
Technology	12.9%	14.7%
Industrials	11.4%	19.1%
Consumer Defensive	9.1%	13.0%
Basic Materials	7.6%	3.4%
Real Estate	3.5%	-
Healthcare	0.7%	21.3%
Communication Services	-	3.9%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

RFV vs. BSMC — Risk / Return Rank

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

RFV

RFV Risk / Return Rank: 39
RFV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
RFV Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
RFV Omega Ratio Rank: 37
RFV Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
RFV Martin Ratio Rank: 38

BSMC

BSMC Risk / Return Rank: 52
BSMC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
BSMC Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
BSMC Omega Ratio Rank: 47
BSMC Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
BSMC Martin Ratio Rank: 56

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.

RFV vs. BSMC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF (RFV) 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.

	RFV	BSMC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.39	1.68	-0.29
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.13	2.50	-0.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.29	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.01	2.70	-0.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.94	9.57	-3.63
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RFV vs. BSMC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RFV Sharpe Ratio is 1.39, which is comparable to the BSMC Sharpe Ratio of 1.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RFV and BSMC, 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

	RFV	BSMC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.39	1.68	-0.29
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.46	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.50	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.38	1.13	-0.75

Drawdowns

RFV vs. BSMC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RFV drawdown since its inception was -71.82%, which is greater than BSMC's maximum drawdown of -19.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RFV and BSMC.

Drawdown Indicators

	RFV	BSMC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-71.82%	-19.15%	-52.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.51%	-9.02%	-3.49%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.65%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.65%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-52.24%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.36%	-1.95%	+1.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.79%	-2.68%	-7.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.23%	2.54%	+1.69%

Volatility

RFV vs. BSMC - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF (RFV) has a higher volatility of 4.60% compared to Brandes U.S. Small-Mid Cap Value ETF (BSMC) at 3.97%. This indicates that RFV'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.

Volatility by Period

	RFV	BSMC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.60%	3.97%	+0.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.86%	10.06%	+1.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.13%	14.52%	+3.61%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.08%	16.09%	+5.99%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.99%	16.09%	+8.90%

RFV vs. BSMC - Expense Ratio Comparison

RFV has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than BSMC's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

RFV vs. BSMC - Dividend Comparison

RFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.84%, more than BSMC's 0.95% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%	0.00%	0.00%
RFV Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Value ETF	1.84%	2.07%	1.31%	1.27%	2.05%	1.60%	1.52%	1.71%	1.39%	1.36%	0.88%	1.79%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RFV and BSMC in my portfolio?

RFV and BSMC have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RFV or BSMC?

RFV has higher volatility (4.60%) compared to BSMC (3.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RFV dropped -71.82% vs BSMC's -19.15%.

Which ETF is better, RFV or BSMC?

On 1-year performance, RFV leads with 25.06% vs 24.26% for BSMC. On fees, RFV is cheaper at 0.35% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, RFV or BSMC?

Over the 1-year period, RFV has performed better with a 25.06% return vs 24.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RFV or BSMC?

RFV is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.70% for BSMC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RFV or BSMC?

RFV has the higher dividend yield at 1.84%, compared with 0.95% for BSMC.

What is the main difference between RFV and BSMC?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Brandes. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RFV and 0.70% for BSMC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BSMC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.68 vs 1.39), 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.