PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
VO vs. IMCB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

VO vs. IMCB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF (VO) and iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VO achieves a 10.05% return, which is significantly lower than IMCB's 14.72% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with VO having a 11.55% annualized return and IMCB not far behind at 11.32%.


VO

1D
-0.45%
1M
3.20%
YTD
10.05%
6M
9.73%
1Y
18.13%
3Y*
16.69%
5Y*
7.87%
10Y*
11.55%

IMCB

1D
-0.24%
1M
5.22%
YTD
14.72%
6M
14.61%
1Y
23.24%
3Y*
17.84%
5Y*
8.81%
10Y*
11.32%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

VO vs. IMCB - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
VO
Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF
10.05%11.62%15.31%16.03%-18.73%24.70%18.10%30.98%-9.24%19.28%
IMCB
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF
14.72%10.25%15.10%16.37%-16.09%22.81%13.35%31.49%-11.53%19.70%

Correlation

The correlation between VO and IMCB is 0.98 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


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

0.98

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.99

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.99

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.98

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 6, 2004

0.96

The correlation between VO and IMCB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

VO vs. IMCB - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
VO
IMCB

Technology

18.6%
21.3%

Industrials

17.9%
19.0%

Financial Services

12.8%
12.0%

Consumer Cyclical

8.6%
9.0%

Energy

8.5%
7.4%

Utilities

8.3%
6.2%

Healthcare

7.6%
7.9%

Real Estate

5.4%
4.3%

Consumer Defensive

4.8%
5.1%

Basic Materials

4.2%
5.3%

Communication Services

3.1%
2.3%

Technology

VO
18.6%
IMCB
21.3%

Industrials

VO
17.9%
IMCB
19.0%

Financial Services

VO
12.8%
IMCB
12.0%

Consumer Cyclical

VO
8.6%
IMCB
9.0%

Energy

VO
8.5%
IMCB
7.4%

Utilities

VO
8.3%
IMCB
6.2%

Healthcare

VO
7.6%
IMCB
7.9%

Real Estate

VO
5.4%
IMCB
4.3%

Consumer Defensive

VO
4.8%
IMCB
5.1%

Basic Materials

VO
4.2%
IMCB
5.3%

Communication Services

VO
3.1%
IMCB
2.3%

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

VO vs. IMCB — Risk / Return Rank

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

VO
VO Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
VO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4141
Sortino Ratio Rank
VO Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
VO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
VO Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
Martin Ratio Rank

IMCB
IMCB Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
IMCB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5353
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IMCB Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
IMCB Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
IMCB Calmar Ratio Rank: 5858
Calmar Ratio Rank
IMCB Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
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.

VO vs. IMCB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF (VO) and iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB). 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.


VOIMCBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.47

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.32

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.23

2.90

-0.67

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.50

11.50

-3.00

VO vs. IMCB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VO Sharpe Ratio is 1.48, which is comparable to the IMCB Sharpe Ratio of 1.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VO and IMCB, 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


VOIMCBDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.48

1.83

-0.35

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.45

0.50

-0.05

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.61

0.58

+0.03

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.50

0.50

0.00

Drawdowns

VO vs. IMCB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VO drawdown since its inception was -58.87%, roughly equal to the maximum IMCB drawdown of -58.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VO and IMCB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


VOIMCBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.87%

-58.80%

-0.07%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.17%

-8.05%

-0.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.02%

-19.80%

+0.78%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-27.57%

-25.15%

-2.42%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.37%

-40.99%

+1.62%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.45%

-0.24%

-0.21%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.86%

-7.73%

-0.13%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.14%

2.03%

+0.11%

Volatility

VO vs. IMCB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF (VO) is 2.99%, while iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB) has a volatility of 3.31%. This indicates that VO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IMCB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


VOIMCBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.99%

3.31%

-0.32%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.21%

9.58%

-0.37%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.34%

12.75%

-0.41%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.59%

17.57%

+0.02%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.95%

19.65%

-0.70%

VO vs. IMCB - Expense Ratio Comparison

VO has a 0.03% expense ratio, which is lower than IMCB's 0.04% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

VO vs. IMCB - Dividend Comparison

VO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.36%, more than IMCB's 1.21% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
IMCB
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF
1.21%1.42%1.43%1.55%1.70%1.08%1.12%1.32%1.80%1.31%1.79%1.47%
VO
Vanguard Mid-Cap ETF
1.36%1.52%1.49%1.52%1.60%1.12%1.45%1.48%1.82%1.35%1.45%1.47%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.98, VO and IMCB move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

IMCB has higher volatility (3.31%) compared to VO (2.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VO dropped -58.87% vs IMCB's -58.80%.

On 10-year performance, VO leads with 11.55% vs 11.32% for IMCB. On fees, VO is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, VO has been the lower-risk option at 2.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, VO has performed better with a 11.55% return vs 11.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VO is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.04% for IMCB.

VO has the higher dividend yield at 1.36%, compared with 1.21% for IMCB.

VO tracks CRSP US Mid Cap Index, while IMCB tracks IMCB-US - Morningstar U.S. Mid Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.03% for VO and 0.04% for IMCB.

IMCB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.83 vs 1.48), 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 VO and IMCB

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