BBHM vs KONG
BBH Select Mid Cap ETF vs Formidable Fortress ETF
Which is better, BBHM or KONG?
KONG has been ahead.
BBHM has a lower expense ratio. KONG led over 1Y. KONG is less concentrated, with 43.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.9%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BBHM | KONG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.81%Best | 0.89% |
| AUM | $381M | $23M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.34% |
| Holdings | 60 | 106 |
| YTD Return | +1.68% | +8.48%Best |
| 1Y Return | +5.49% | +9.69%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +9.30% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +6.61% |
| Top 10 Weight | 44.9% | 43.3%Best |
| Fund Family | Brown Brothers Harriman | Formidable Funds |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Blend | Mid Cap Blend |
| Inception | Nov 17, 2025 | Jul 21, 2021 |
Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
BBHM vs KONG growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
BBHM vs KONG Performance
BBH Select Mid Cap ETF (BBHM) is an ETF from Brown Brothers Harriman and Formidable Fortress ETF (KONG) is an ETF from Formidable Funds. Over the past year BBHM returned +5.49% while KONG returned +9.69%. Year to date, BBHM is up 1.68% versus a gain of 8.48% for KONG.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BBHM charges 0.81% per year while KONG charges 0.89%. On a $10,000 position that is $81 vs $89 annually, a gap of $8 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BBHM currently yields 0.00% against 0.34% for KONG.
Holdings Overlap
9.1% of BBHM's money is in holdings KONG also owns. 5.7% of KONG's money is in holdings BBHM also owns.
BBHM and KONG share little of their money.
2 positions in common, counted across the 29 positions we hold weights for in BBHM and 34 in KONG, against full books of 60 and 106.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 32 positions for KONG that do not appear in our book for BBHM (95.3% of the fund), and 26 for BBHM that do not appear in KONG (86.3%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of BBHM and KONG you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BBHM or KONG?
BBHM has an expense ratio of 0.81% while KONG charges 0.89%. BBHM is the cheaper option, by $8 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BBHM or KONG?
Over the past year BBHM returned +5.49% vs +9.69% for KONG, so KONG leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between BBHM and KONG?
9.1% of BBHM's money is in holdings KONG also owns. 5.7% of KONG's is in holdings BBHM also owns. They hold 2 positions in common, counted across the 29 positions we hold weights for in BBHM and 34 in KONG.
Which pays a higher dividend, BBHM or KONG?
BBHM yields 0.00% while KONG yields 0.34%, so KONG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is KONG better than BBHM?
BBHM has a lower expense ratio. KONG led over 1Y. KONG is less concentrated, with 43.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.