AMZD vs. BDGS

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

AMZD (Direxion Daily AMZN Bear 1X Shares) and BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AMZD is a Inverse Equities fund tracking the Amazon.com, Inc. (-100%), while BDGS is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Bridges. AMZD is passively managed, while BDGS is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, AMZD returned -20.92%/yr vs 13.91%/yr for BDGS. At a correlation of -0.61, they often move in opposite directions. AMZD charges 1.09%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for BDGS.

Performance

AMZD vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Daily AMZN Bear 1X Shares (AMZD) and Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AMZD achieves a -9.22% return, which is significantly lower than BDGS's 6.04% return.

AMZD

• 1D: 2.01%
• 1M: -1.86%
• 6M: -6.33%
• YTD: -9.22%
• 1Y: -13.56%
• 3Y*: -20.92%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BDGS

• 1D: -0.28%
• 1M: 0.60%
• 6M: 5.67%
• YTD: 6.04%
• 1Y: 11.76%
• 3Y*: 13.91%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AMZD vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
AMZD Direxion Daily AMZN Bear 1X Shares	-9.22%	-9.84%	-30.80%	-27.84%
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	6.04%	10.61%	19.07%	8.23%

Correlation

The correlation between AMZD and BDGS is -0.66, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.66
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2023	-0.61

The correlation between AMZD and BDGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.66 to -0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

AMZD vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

AMZD

AMZD Risk / Return Rank: 5
AMZD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
AMZD Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
AMZD Omega Ratio Rank: 6
AMZD Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
AMZD Martin Ratio Rank: 4

BDGS

BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 76
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 79
BDGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
BDGS Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

AMZD vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily AMZN Bear 1X Shares (AMZD) and Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	AMZD	BDGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.44	1.85	-2.29
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.43	2.78	-3.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.95	1.37	-0.42
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.48	2.93	-3.41
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.01	11.94	-12.95

AMZD vs. BDGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AMZD Sharpe Ratio is -0.44, which is lower than the BDGS Sharpe Ratio of 1.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AMZD and BDGS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

AMZD vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AMZD drawdown since its inception was -73.05%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMZD and BDGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	AMZD	BDGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-73.05%	-9.12%	-63.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-28.27%	-4.03%	-24.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-59.20%	-9.12%	-50.08%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-70.46%	-0.45%	-70.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-49.67%	-0.67%	-49.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.45%	0.99%	+12.46%

Volatility

AMZD vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison

Direxion Daily AMZN Bear 1X Shares (AMZD) has a higher volatility of 9.79% compared to Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) at 2.03%. This indicates that AMZD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BDGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AMZD	BDGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.79%	2.03%	+7.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.10%	5.31%	+16.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	31.28%	6.38%	+24.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	33.38%	8.17%	+25.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	33.38%	8.17%	+25.21%

AMZD vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

AMZD has a 1.09% expense ratio, which is higher than BDGS's 0.87% expense ratio.

Dividends

AMZD vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison

AMZD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.41%, more than BDGS's 0.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
AMZD Direxion Daily AMZN Bear 1X Shares	3.41%	3.61%	5.15%	6.83%	2.45%
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	0.52%	0.55%	1.81%	0.84%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AMZD and BDGS in my portfolio?

AMZD and BDGS have a correlation of -0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AMZD or BDGS?

AMZD has higher volatility (9.79%) compared to BDGS (2.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AMZD dropped -73.05% vs BDGS's -9.12%.

Which ETF is better, AMZD or BDGS?

On 3-year performance, BDGS leads with 13.91% vs -20.92% for AMZD. On fees, BDGS is cheaper at 0.87% per year. On volatility, BDGS has been the lower-risk option at 2.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AMZD or BDGS?

Over the 3-year period, BDGS has performed better with a 13.91% return vs -20.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AMZD or BDGS?

BDGS is cheaper with a 0.87% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for AMZD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AMZD or BDGS?

AMZD has the higher dividend yield at 3.41%, compared with 0.52% for BDGS.

What is the main difference between AMZD and BDGS?

AMZD is categorized as Inverse Equities, while BDGS is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Direxion and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 1.09% for AMZD and 0.87% for BDGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BDGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.85 vs -0.44), 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.