SMDV vs. VB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SMDV (ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF) and VB (Vanguard Small-Cap ETF) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds - SMDV tracks the Russell 2000 Dividend Growth Index while VB tracks the CRSP US Small Cap Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SMDV returned 7.08%/yr vs 11.30%/yr for VB. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SMDV charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.05%/yr for VB.

Performance

SMDV vs. VB - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SMDV achieves a 8.80% return, which is significantly lower than VB's 14.16% return. Over the past 10 years, SMDV has underperformed VB with an annualized return of 7.08%, while VB has yielded a comparatively higher 11.30% annualized return.

SMDV

• 1D: -1.58%
• 1M: -0.39%
• YTD: 8.80%
• 6M: 7.57%
• 1Y: 13.74%
• 3Y*: 9.13%
• 5Y*: 3.88%
• 10Y*: 7.08%

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%

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

SMDV vs. VB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SMDV ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF	8.80%	0.26%	7.03%	8.99%	-5.90%	18.98%	-4.74%	17.23%	-0.58%	4.63%
VB Vanguard Small-Cap ETF	14.16%	8.87%	14.17%	18.22%	-17.51%	17.57%	19.19%	27.34%	-9.34%	16.26%

Correlation

The correlation between SMDV and VB is 0.74, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.74
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.83
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2015	0.80

The correlation between SMDV and VB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

SMDV vs. VB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SMDV	VB
Financial Services	31.9%	12.6%
Industrials	22.2%	20.8%
Utilities	15.8%	3.3%
Basic Materials	7.8%	4.8%
Real Estate	7.4%	7.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.8%	3.4%
Consumer Cyclical	4.1%	11.3%
Technology	3.2%	17.2%
Healthcare	1.8%	11.1%
Communication Services	1.0%	3.1%
Energy	-	4.7%

Return for Risk

SMDV vs. VB — Risk / Return Rank

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

SMDV

SMDV Risk / Return Rank: 26
SMDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 24
SMDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
SMDV Omega Ratio Rank: 24
SMDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
SMDV Martin Ratio Rank: 29

VB

VB Risk / Return Rank: 56
VB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
VB Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
VB Omega Ratio Rank: 48
VB Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
VB Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

SMDV vs. VB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF (SMDV) 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.

	SMDV	VB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.87	1.78	-0.91
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.42	2.56	-1.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.31	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.41	3.22	-1.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.25	11.87	-7.63
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SMDV vs. VB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SMDV Sharpe Ratio is 0.87, which is lower than the VB Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SMDV and VB, 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

	SMDV	VB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.87	1.78	-0.91
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.21	0.34	-0.14
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.34	0.53	-0.19
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.38	0.44	-0.06

Drawdowns

SMDV vs. VB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SMDV drawdown since its inception was -34.12%, smaller than the maximum VB drawdown of -59.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMDV and VB.

Drawdown Indicators

	SMDV	VB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.12%	-59.56%	+25.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.79%	-8.98%	-0.81%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.23%	-25.36%	+4.13%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-21.23%	-28.15%	+6.92%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.12%	-42.05%	+7.93%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.76%	-0.65%	-2.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.93%	-8.44%	+2.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.25%	2.43%	+0.82%

Volatility

SMDV vs. VB - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF (SMDV) and Vanguard Small-Cap ETF (VB) have volatilities of 4.41% and 4.42%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SMDV	VB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.41%	4.42%	-0.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.55%	11.72%	-1.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.85%	16.28%	-0.43%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.69%	20.74%	-2.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.73%	21.42%	-0.69%

SMDV vs. VB - Expense Ratio Comparison

SMDV has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than VB's 0.05% expense ratio.

Dividends

SMDV vs. VB - Dividend Comparison

SMDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.42%, more than VB's 1.19% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
SMDV ProShares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF	2.42%	2.67%	2.68%	2.69%	2.51%	2.02%	2.13%	2.03%	1.97%	1.84%	1.35%	1.81%
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

Can I hold both SMDV and VB in my portfolio?

SMDV and VB have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SMDV or VB?

VB has higher volatility (4.42%) compared to SMDV (4.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMDV dropped -34.12% vs VB's -59.56%.

Which ETF is better, SMDV or VB?

On 10-year performance, VB leads with 11.30% vs 7.08% for SMDV. On fees, VB is cheaper at 0.05% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SMDV or VB?

Over the 10-year period, VB has performed better with a 11.30% return vs 7.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SMDV or VB?

VB is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for SMDV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SMDV or VB?

SMDV has the higher dividend yield at 2.42%, compared with 1.19% for VB.

What is the main difference between SMDV and VB?

SMDV tracks Russell 2000 Dividend Growth Index, while VB tracks CRSP US Small Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for SMDV and 0.05% for VB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

VB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.78 vs 0.87), 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.