PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SMDV vs. CSM
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

SMDV vs. CSM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF (SMDV) and Proshares Large Cap Core Plus (CSM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SMDV achieves a 18.11% return, which is significantly higher than CSM's 9.15% return. Over the past 10 years, SMDV has underperformed CSM with an annualized return of 7.53%, while CSM has yielded a comparatively higher 14.08% annualized return.


SMDV

1D
-0.18%
1M
0.26%
6M
10.74%
YTD
18.11%
1Y
23.79%
3Y*
10.63%
5Y*
6.99%
10Y*
7.53%
ALL TIME*
8.24%

CSM

1D
0.77%
1M
1.39%
6M
8.81%
YTD
9.15%
1Y
23.59%
3Y*
19.26%
5Y*
12.61%
10Y*
14.08%
ALL TIME*
14.88%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$421.46K$485.98K$561.72K
$4.61M$5.90M$3.47M

SMDV vs. CSM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
SMDV
ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF
18.11%0.26%7.03%8.99%-5.90%18.98%-4.74%17.23%-0.58%4.63%
CSM
Proshares Large Cap Core Plus
9.15%21.84%22.09%23.50%-18.27%33.13%10.94%29.26%-7.88%22.52%

Correlation

The correlation between SMDV and CSM is 0.44, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.44

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.57

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.66

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.66

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2015

0.65

Over the past year, the correlation between SMDV and CSM has dropped to 0.44 - well below their long-term average of 0.65, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

SMDV vs. CSM - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
SMDV
CSM

Financial Services

31.5%
16.5%

Industrials

21.8%
8.8%

Utilities

17.3%
4.1%

Basic Materials

10.5%
2.5%

Real Estate

6.0%
4.2%

Consumer Cyclical

5.1%
8.9%

Consumer Defensive

3.9%
4.5%

Healthcare

1.9%
8.4%

Communication Services

1.1%
6.8%

Technology

0.8%
29.3%

Energy

-

2.8%

Financial Services

SMDV
31.5%
CSM
16.5%

Industrials

SMDV
21.8%
CSM
8.8%

Utilities

SMDV
17.3%
CSM
4.1%

Basic Materials

SMDV
10.5%
CSM
2.5%

Real Estate

SMDV
6.0%
CSM
4.2%

Consumer Cyclical

SMDV
5.1%
CSM
8.9%

Consumer Defensive

SMDV
3.9%
CSM
4.5%

Healthcare

SMDV
1.9%
CSM
8.4%

Communication Services

SMDV
1.1%
CSM
6.8%

Technology

SMDV
0.8%
CSM
29.3%

Energy

SMDV

-

CSM
2.8%

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

SMDV vs. CSM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

SMDV
SMDV Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
SMDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6262
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SMDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
SMDV Omega Ratio Rank: 6161
Omega Ratio Rank
SMDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
SMDV Martin Ratio Rank: 6161
Martin Ratio Rank

CSM
CSM Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
CSM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CSM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
CSM Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
CSM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
CSM Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

SMDV vs. CSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF (SMDV) and Proshares Large Cap Core Plus (CSM). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


SMDVCSMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.26

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.30

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.30

2.32

-0.03

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.27

9.34

-2.08

SMDV vs. CSM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SMDV Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is comparable to the CSM Sharpe Ratio of 1.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SMDV and CSM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

SMDV vs. CSM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SMDV drawdown since its inception was -34.12%, smaller than the maximum CSM drawdown of -36.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMDV and CSM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SMDVCSMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.12%

-36.11%

+1.99%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.79%

-9.40%

-0.39%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.23%

-18.30%

-2.93%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.23%

-23.82%

+2.59%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.12%

-36.11%

+1.99%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.36%

-0.69%

-1.67%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.87%

-4.02%

-1.85%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.09%

2.34%

+0.75%

Volatility

SMDV vs. CSM - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF (SMDV) has a higher volatility of 4.40% compared to Proshares Large Cap Core Plus (CSM) at 3.59%. This indicates that SMDV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SMDVCSMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.40%

3.59%

+0.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.24%

9.64%

+0.60%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.45%

12.69%

+2.76%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.56%

17.19%

+1.37%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.75%

18.37%

+2.38%

SMDV vs. CSM - Expense Ratio Comparison

SMDV has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than CSM's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

SMDV vs. CSM - Dividend Comparison

SMDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.29%, more than CSM's 1.04% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CSM
Proshares Large Cap Core Plus
1.04%1.04%1.06%1.17%1.37%0.78%1.21%1.41%1.54%1.28%1.49%1.67%
SMDV
ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF
2.29%2.67%2.68%2.69%2.51%2.02%2.13%2.03%1.97%1.84%1.35%1.81%

Frequently Asked Questions


SMDV and CSM have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SMDV has higher volatility (4.40%) compared to CSM (3.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMDV dropped -34.12% vs CSM's -36.11%.

On 10-year performance, CSM leads with 14.08% vs 7.53% for SMDV. On fees, SMDV is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, CSM has been the lower-risk option at 3.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, CSM has performed better with a 14.08% return vs 7.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SMDV is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for CSM.

SMDV has the higher dividend yield at 2.29%, compared with 1.04% for CSM.

SMDV is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while CSM is Long-Short. SMDV tracks Russell 2000 Dividend Growth Index, while CSM tracks Credit Suisse 130/30 Large-Cap Index. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for SMDV and 0.45% for CSM.

CSM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.72 vs 1.46), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SMDV and CSM

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