PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SMTH vs. BNDS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

SMTH vs. BNDS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ALPS Smith Core Plus Bond ETF (SMTH) and Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF (BNDS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SMTH achieves a 0.34% return, which is significantly lower than BNDS's 4.23% return.


SMTH

1D
-0.21%
1M
0.44%
YTD
0.34%
6M
0.02%
1Y
5.19%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BNDS

1D
-0.20%
1M
0.17%
YTD
4.23%
6M
4.33%
1Y
12.86%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SMTH vs. BNDS - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between SMTH and BNDS is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.47

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 16, 2025

0.48

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

SMTH vs. BNDS — Risk / Return Rank

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

SMTH
SMTH Risk / Return Rank: 3838
Overall Rank
SMTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SMTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
SMTH Omega Ratio Rank: 3535
Omega Ratio Rank
SMTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 3939
Calmar Ratio Rank
SMTH Martin Ratio Rank: 3737
Martin Ratio Rank

BNDS
BNDS Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
BNDS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BNDS Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
BNDS Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
BNDS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
BNDS Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

SMTH vs. BNDS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ALPS Smith Core Plus Bond ETF (SMTH) and Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF (BNDS). 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.


SMTHBNDSDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.34

3.65

-2.31

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.05

5.40

-3.34

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.78

-0.54

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.90

3.75

-1.85

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

5.72

17.29

-11.57

SMTH vs. BNDS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SMTH Sharpe Ratio is 1.34, which is lower than the BNDS Sharpe Ratio of 3.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SMTH and BNDS, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


SMTHBNDSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.34

3.65

-2.31

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.19

1.75

-0.56

Drawdowns

SMTH vs. BNDS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SMTH drawdown since its inception was -4.11%, smaller than the maximum BNDS drawdown of -6.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMTH and BNDS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SMTHBNDSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-4.11%

-6.96%

+2.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.74%

-3.45%

+0.71%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.41%

-0.34%

-1.07%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.06%

-0.82%

-0.24%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.91%

0.75%

+0.16%

Volatility

SMTH vs. BNDS - Volatility Comparison

ALPS Smith Core Plus Bond ETF (SMTH) has a higher volatility of 1.31% compared to Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF (BNDS) at 0.86%. This indicates that SMTH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BNDS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SMTHBNDSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.31%

0.86%

+0.45%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.66%

2.74%

-0.08%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.88%

3.55%

+0.33%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.59%

5.29%

-0.70%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.59%

5.29%

-0.70%

SMTH vs. BNDS - Expense Ratio Comparison

SMTH has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than BNDS's 0.81% expense ratio.


Dividends

SMTH vs. BNDS - Dividend Comparison

SMTH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.40%, less than BNDS's 7.97% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
BNDS
Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF
7.97%7.98%0.00%0.00%
SMTH
ALPS Smith Core Plus Bond ETF
4.40%4.46%4.58%0.24%

Frequently Asked Questions


SMTH and BNDS have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SMTH has higher volatility (1.31%) compared to BNDS (0.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SMTH dropped -4.11% vs BNDS's -6.96%.

On 1-year performance, BNDS leads with 12.86% vs 5.19% for SMTH. On fees, SMTH is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, BNDS has been the lower-risk option at 0.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BNDS has performed better with a 12.86% return vs 5.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SMTH is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.81% for BNDS.

BNDS has the higher dividend yield at 7.97%, compared with 4.40% for SMTH.

They also come from different issuers: ALPS and InfraCap. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for SMTH and 0.81% for BNDS.

BNDS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.65 vs 1.34), 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 SMTH and BNDS

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