SFGV vs. BINC

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV) and iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC).

SFGV and BINC are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. SFGV is an actively managed fund by Sequoia. It was launched on Jan 17, 2024. BINC is an actively managed fund by iShares. It was launched on May 19, 2023.

Performance

SFGV vs. BINC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV) and iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

SFGV vs. BINC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
SFGV Sequoia Global Value ETF	4.20%	18.84%	10.71%
BINC iShares Flexible Income Active ETF	-0.78%	7.57%	6.10%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SFGV achieves a 4.20% return, which is significantly higher than BINC's -0.78% return.

SFGV

• 1D: 1.96%
• 1M: -6.22%
• YTD: 4.20%
• 6M: 7.00%
• 1Y: 21.05%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BINC

• 1D: 0.33%
• 1M: -2.11%
• YTD: -0.78%
• 6M: 0.65%
• 1Y: 5.08%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SFGV vs. BINC - Expense Ratio Comparison

SFGV has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than BINC's 0.40% expense ratio.

BINC

iShares Flexible Income Active ETF

SFGV

Sequoia Global Value ETF

Return for Risk

SFGV vs. BINC — Risk / Return Rank

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

SFGV

SFGV Risk / Return Rank: 73
SFGV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
SFGV Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
SFGV Omega Ratio Rank: 74
SFGV Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
SFGV Martin Ratio Rank: 75

BINC

BINC Risk / Return Rank: 84
BINC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
BINC Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
BINC Omega Ratio Rank: 91
BINC Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
BINC Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

SFGV vs. BINC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV) and iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC). 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.

	SFGV	BINC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.36	1.74	-0.37
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.96	2.29	-0.33
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.38	-0.10
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.76	1.91	-0.15
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.13	7.93	+0.20
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SFGV vs. BINC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SFGV Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is comparable to the BINC Sharpe Ratio of 1.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SFGV and BINC, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	SFGV	BINC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.36	1.74	-0.37
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.16	2.28	-1.12

Correlation

The correlation between SFGV and BINC is 0.51, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

SFGV vs. BINC - Dividend Comparison

SFGV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.41%, less than BINC's 5.91% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023
SFGV Sequoia Global Value ETF	2.41%	2.52%	2.23%	0.00%
BINC iShares Flexible Income Active ETF	5.91%	5.86%	6.14%	3.13%

Drawdowns

SFGV vs. BINC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SFGV drawdown since its inception was -14.51%, which is greater than BINC's maximum drawdown of -2.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SFGV and BINC.

Drawdown Indicators

	SFGV	BINC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.51%	-2.69%	-11.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.11%	-2.69%	-9.42%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.22%	-2.14%	-4.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.88%	-0.33%	-1.55%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.62%	0.65%	+1.97%

Volatility

SFGV vs. BINC - Volatility Comparison

Sequoia Global Value ETF (SFGV) has a higher volatility of 4.97% compared to iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) at 1.25%. This indicates that SFGV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BINC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SFGV	BINC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.97%	1.25%	+3.72%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.69%	1.69%	+7.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.51%	2.94%	+12.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.37%	3.03%	+10.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.37%	3.03%	+10.34%