BDGS vs. CANQ

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) and Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF (CANQ).

BDGS and CANQ are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. BDGS is an actively managed fund by Bridges. It was launched on May 10, 2023. CANQ is an actively managed fund by Calamos. It was launched on Feb 13, 2024.

Performance

BDGS vs. CANQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) and Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF (CANQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

BDGS vs. CANQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	-1.41%	10.61%	17.74%
CANQ Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF	-5.71%	11.69%	19.48%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BDGS achieves a -1.41% return, which is significantly higher than CANQ's -5.71% return.

BDGS

• 1D: 1.96%
• 1M: -1.14%
• YTD: -1.41%
• 6M: 0.11%
• 1Y: 10.54%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CANQ

• 1D: 1.68%
• 1M: -4.76%
• YTD: -5.71%
• 6M: -5.33%
• 1Y: 9.46%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BDGS vs. CANQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

BDGS has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than CANQ's 0.90% expense ratio.

CANQ

Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF

BDGS

Bridges Capital Tactical ETF

Return for Risk

BDGS vs. CANQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

BDGS

BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 73
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 78
BDGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
BDGS Martin Ratio Rank: 86

CANQ

CANQ Risk / Return Rank: 40
CANQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
CANQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
CANQ Omega Ratio Rank: 40
CANQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
CANQ Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

BDGS vs. CANQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) and Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF (CANQ). 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.

	BDGS	CANQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.99	0.81	+0.17
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.67	1.20	+0.47
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.16	+0.12
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.80	0.90	+0.90
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.34	3.03	+6.31
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BDGS vs. CANQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BDGS Sharpe Ratio is 0.99, which is comparable to the CANQ Sharpe Ratio of 0.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BDGS and CANQ, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BDGS	CANQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.99	0.81	+0.17
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.51	0.90	+0.61

Correlation

The correlation between BDGS and CANQ is 0.73, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

BDGS vs. CANQ - Dividend Comparison

BDGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.56%, less than CANQ's 5.00% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	0.56%	0.55%	1.81%	0.84%
CANQ Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF	4.57%	5.02%	4.19%	0.00%

Drawdowns

BDGS vs. CANQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BDGS drawdown since its inception was -9.12%, smaller than the maximum CANQ drawdown of -12.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BDGS and CANQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	BDGS	CANQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.12%	-12.79%	+3.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.85%	-10.77%	+4.92%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.15%	-9.26%	+7.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.67%	-2.98%	+2.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.13%	3.20%	-2.07%

Volatility

BDGS vs. CANQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) is 3.39%, while Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF (CANQ) has a volatility of 3.72%. This indicates that BDGS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CANQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BDGS	CANQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.39%	3.72%	-0.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.09%	7.98%	-2.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.70%	11.67%	-0.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.35%	12.73%	-4.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.35%	12.73%	-4.38%