SMCP vs. VB
SMCP (AlphaMark Actively Managed Small Cap ETF) and VB (Vanguard Small-Cap ETF) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds - SMCP tracks the Actively Managed while VB tracks the CRSP US Small Cap Index. Both are passively managed. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SMCP charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.05%/yr for VB.
Performance
SMCP vs. VB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
SMCP
- 1D
- -0.30%
- 1M
- -25.99%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
VB
- 1D
- -0.65%
- 1M
- 3.52%
- YTD
- 14.16%
- 6M
- 14.12%
- 1Y
- 28.82%
- 3Y*
- 17.05%
- 5Y*
- 7.11%
- 10Y*
- 11.30%
SMCP vs. VB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
SMCP AlphaMark Actively Managed Small Cap ETF | -25.99% |
VB Vanguard Small-Cap ETF | 6.17% |
Correlation
The correlation between SMCP and VB is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 9, 2026 | 0.25 |
SMCP vs. VB - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
SMCP
VB
Financial Services
Industrials
Technology
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Energy
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Real Estate
Utilities
Financial Services
SMCP
VB
Industrials
SMCP
VB
Technology
SMCP
VB
Healthcare
SMCP
VB
Consumer Defensive
SMCP
VB
Basic Materials
SMCP
VB
Energy
SMCP
VB
Consumer Cyclical
SMCP
VB
Communication Services
SMCP
VB
Real Estate
SMCP
VB
Utilities
SMCP
VB
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
SMCP vs. VB — Risk / Return Rank
SMCP
VB
SMCP vs. VB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AlphaMark Actively Managed Small Cap ETF (SMCP) and Vanguard Small-Cap ETF (VB). 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| SMCP | VB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 1.78 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.34 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.53 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -1.43 | 0.44 | -1.87 |
Drawdowns
SMCP vs. VB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SMCP drawdown since its inception was -27.86%, smaller than the maximum VB drawdown of -59.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMCP and VB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SMCP | VB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -27.86% | -59.56% | +31.70% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -8.98% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -25.36% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -28.15% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -42.05% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -25.99% | -0.65% | -25.34% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.33% | -8.44% | +3.11% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.43% | — |
Volatility
SMCP vs. VB - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SMCP | VB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 4.42% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 11.72% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 43.62% | 16.28% | +27.34% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 43.62% | 20.74% | +22.88% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 43.62% | 21.42% | +22.20% |
SMCP vs. VB - Expense Ratio Comparison
SMCP has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than VB's 0.05% expense ratio.
Dividends
SMCP vs. VB - Dividend Comparison
SMCP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while VB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.19%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SMCP AlphaMark Actively Managed Small Cap ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
VB Vanguard Small-Cap ETF | 1.19% | 1.33% | 1.30% | 1.55% | 1.59% | 1.24% | 1.14% | 1.39% | 1.67% | 1.35% | 1.50% | 1.48% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SMCP and VB have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, VB is cheaper at 0.05% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
VB is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for SMCP.
VB has the higher dividend yield at 1.19%, compared with 0.00% for SMCP.
SMCP tracks Actively Managed, while VB tracks CRSP US Small Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: AlphaMark Advisors and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for SMCP and 0.05% for VB.
Find the right allocation for SMCP and VB
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