SMCO vs. IMCB
SMCO (Hilton Small-Midcap Opportunity ETF) and IMCB (iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. SMCO is actively managed, while IMCB is passively managed. Over the past year, SMCO returned 22.05% vs 23.24% for IMCB. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SMCO charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for IMCB.
Performance
SMCO vs. IMCB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SMCO achieves a 12.31% return, which is significantly lower than IMCB's 14.72% return.
SMCO
- 1D
- -0.37%
- 1M
- 2.03%
- YTD
- 12.31%
- 6M
- 11.53%
- 1Y
- 22.05%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IMCB
- 1D
- -0.24%
- 1M
- 5.22%
- YTD
- 14.72%
- 6M
- 14.61%
- 1Y
- 23.24%
- 3Y*
- 17.84%
- 5Y*
- 8.81%
- 10Y*
- 11.32%
SMCO vs. IMCB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
SMCO Hilton Small-Midcap Opportunity ETF | 12.31% | 6.46% | 17.78% | 7.84% |
IMCB iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF | 14.72% | 10.25% | 15.10% | 8.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between SMCO and IMCB is 0.90, 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 | 0.90 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 30, 2023 | 0.91 |
The correlation between SMCO and IMCB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
SMCO vs. IMCB — Risk / Return Rank
SMCO
IMCB
SMCO vs. IMCB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Hilton Small-Midcap Opportunity ETF (SMCO) and iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB). 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.
| SMCO | IMCB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.43 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.53 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.32 | -0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.32 | 2.90 | -0.58 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.82 | 11.50 | -3.67 |
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
| SMCO | IMCB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.41 | 1.83 | -0.43 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.50 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.58 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.00 | 0.50 | +0.50 |
Drawdowns
SMCO vs. IMCB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SMCO drawdown since its inception was -22.71%, smaller than the maximum IMCB drawdown of -58.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMCO and IMCB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SMCO | IMCB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.71% | -58.80% | +36.09% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.56% | -8.05% | -1.51% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -19.80% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -25.15% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -40.99% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.37% | -0.24% | -0.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.75% | -7.73% | +3.98% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.83% | 2.03% | +0.80% |
Volatility
SMCO vs. IMCB - Volatility Comparison
Hilton Small-Midcap Opportunity ETF (SMCO) has a higher volatility of 3.92% compared to iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB) at 3.31%. This indicates that SMCO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IMCB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SMCO | IMCB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.92% | 3.31% | +0.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.81% | 9.58% | +2.23% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.76% | 12.75% | +3.01% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.22% | 17.57% | +0.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.22% | 19.65% | -1.43% |
SMCO vs. IMCB - Expense Ratio Comparison
SMCO has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than IMCB's 0.04% expense ratio.
Dividends
SMCO vs. IMCB - Dividend Comparison
SMCO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%, less than IMCB's 1.21% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IMCB iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF | 1.21% | 1.42% | 1.43% | 1.55% | 1.70% | 1.08% | 1.12% | 1.32% | 1.80% | 1.31% | 1.79% | 1.47% |
SMCO Hilton Small-Midcap Opportunity ETF | 0.90% | 1.01% | 0.47% | 0.05% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.90, SMCO and IMCB move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
SMCO has higher volatility (3.92%) compared to IMCB (3.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMCO dropped -22.71% vs IMCB's -58.80%.
On 1-year performance, IMCB leads with 23.24% vs 22.05% for SMCO. On fees, IMCB is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, IMCB has been the lower-risk option at 3.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, IMCB has performed better with a 23.24% return vs 22.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IMCB is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for SMCO.
IMCB has the higher dividend yield at 1.21%, compared with 0.90% for SMCO.
They also come from different issuers: Hilton and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for SMCO and 0.04% for IMCB.
IMCB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.83 vs 1.41), 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 SMCO and IMCB
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