Screener
BCFN vs IAT
Baron Financials ETF vs iShares U.S. Regional Banks ETF
Key differences
- IAT costs 0.42% less per year.
- IAT is significantly larger than BCFN — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- IAT has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| BCFN | IAT | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.80% | 0.38% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $48M | $625M |
| Since | 2019 | 2006 |
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 2.76% |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | — | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | index tracking |
| CAGR 1Y | N/A | +28.4% |
| CAGR 3Y | N/A | +25.3% |
| CAGR 5Y | N/A | +2.0% |
| Sharpe 3Y | N/A | 0.85 |
| Volatility 1Y | — | 21.75% |
| Max drawdown | -20.95% | -55.55% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to BCFN and IAT
Explore further