TBFC vs. ASGM

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

TBFC (The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF) and ASGM (Virtus AlphaSimplex Global Macro ETF) are both Tactical Allocation funds. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. TBFC charges 0.44%/yr vs 0.86%/yr for ASGM.

Performance

TBFC vs. ASGM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF (TBFC) and Virtus AlphaSimplex Global Macro ETF (ASGM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TBFC achieves a 5.77% return, which is significantly lower than ASGM's 22.28% return.

TBFC

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 2.07%
• YTD: 5.77%
• 6M: 6.35%
• 1Y: 15.23%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ASGM

• 1D: -0.20%
• 1M: 6.11%
• YTD: 22.28%
• 6M: 24.33%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TBFC vs. ASGM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
TBFC The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF	5.77%	5.83%
ASGM Virtus AlphaSimplex Global Macro ETF	22.28%	11.57%

Correlation

The correlation between TBFC and ASGM is 0.89, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 6, 2025	0.89

Return for Risk

TBFC vs. ASGM — Risk / Return Rank

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

TBFC

TBFC Risk / Return Rank: 71
TBFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
TBFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
TBFC Omega Ratio Rank: 79
TBFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
TBFC Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

TBFC vs. ASGM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF (TBFC) and Virtus AlphaSimplex Global Macro ETF (ASGM). 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.

	TBFC	ASGM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.41	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.44	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.81	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.86	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	TBFC	ASGM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.41	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.51	2.91	-1.40

Drawdowns

TBFC vs. ASGM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TBFC drawdown since its inception was -8.89%, which is greater than ASGM's maximum drawdown of -6.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TBFC and ASGM.

Drawdown Indicators

	TBFC	ASGM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.89%	-6.62%	-2.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.45%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.23%	-0.73%	+0.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.06%	-1.22%	+0.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.29%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	TBFC	ASGM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.06%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.24%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.35%	15.63%	-9.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.14%	15.63%	-8.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.14%	15.63%	-8.49%

TBFC vs. ASGM - Expense Ratio Comparison

TBFC has a 0.44% expense ratio, which is lower than ASGM's 0.86% expense ratio.

Dividends

TBFC vs. ASGM - Dividend Comparison

TBFC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.93%, less than ASGM's 3.70% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
ASGM Virtus AlphaSimplex Global Macro ETF	3.70%	4.52%	0.00%
TBFC The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF	2.93%	3.28%	2.98%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TBFC and ASGM in my portfolio?

TBFC and ASGM have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, TBFC or ASGM?

On fees, TBFC is cheaper at 0.44% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, TBFC or ASGM?

TBFC is cheaper with a 0.44% expense ratio, compared with 0.86% for ASGM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TBFC or ASGM?

ASGM has the higher dividend yield at 3.70%, compared with 2.93% for TBFC.

What is the main difference between TBFC and ASGM?

They also come from different issuers: Brinsmere and Virtus. Their fees differ too: 0.44% for TBFC and 0.86% for ASGM.