Screener
BFOR vs RONB
Barron's 400 ETF vs Baron First Principles ETF
Key differences
- BFOR costs 0.35% less per year.
- BFOR follows a index tracking strategy; RONB uses active selection.
- BFOR has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| BFOR | RONB | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.65% | 1.00% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $211M | $388M |
| Since | 2013 | 2025 |
| Dividend yield | 0.55% | — |
| Asset class | equity | equity |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | active selection |
| CAGR 1Y | +22.3% | N/A |
| CAGR 3Y | +20.1% | N/A |
| CAGR 5Y | +10.0% | N/A |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.94 | N/A |
| Volatility 1Y | 14.92% | — |
| Max drawdown | -41.27% | -13.08% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to BFOR and RONB
Explore further