Screener
BFOR vs KONG
Barron's 400 ETF vs Formidable Fortress ETF
Key differences
- BFOR costs 0.24% less per year.
- BFOR is significantly larger than KONG — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- BFOR is classified as equity, while KONG is alternative — different risk/return profiles.
- BFOR follows a index tracking strategy; KONG uses option income.
- Over the last 3 years, BFOR has delivered higher annualized returns.
- BFOR has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| BFOR | KONG | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.65% | 0.89% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $211M | $22M |
| Since | 2013 | 2021 |
| Dividend yield | 0.55% | 0.36% |
| Asset class | equity | alternative |
| Region | north america | — |
| Strategy | index tracking | option income |
| CAGR 1Y | +22.3% | +6.2% |
| CAGR 3Y | +20.1% | +9.3% |
| CAGR 5Y | +10.0% | N/A |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.94 | 0.49 |
| Volatility 1Y | 14.92% | 10.91% |
| Max drawdown | -41.27% | -19.98% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to BFOR and KONG
Explore further