BDGS vs. CFA
Compare and contrast key facts about Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) and VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Wtd ETF (CFA).
BDGS and CFA 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. CFA is a passively managed fund by Crestview that tracks the performance of the Nasdaq Victory U.S. Large Cap 500 Volatility Weighted Index. It was launched on Jul 2, 2014.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: BDGS or CFA.
Correlation
The correlation between BDGS and CFA is 0.58, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Performance
BDGS vs. CFA - Performance Comparison
Key characteristics
BDGS:
4.50
CFA:
1.64
BDGS:
8.68
CFA:
2.32
BDGS:
2.63
CFA:
1.29
BDGS:
8.26
CFA:
2.57
BDGS:
48.12
CFA:
9.08
BDGS:
0.41%
CFA:
2.00%
BDGS:
4.38%
CFA:
11.06%
BDGS:
-5.38%
CFA:
-37.74%
BDGS:
-0.98%
CFA:
-6.06%
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BDGS achieves a 19.39% return, which is significantly higher than CFA's 16.05% return.
BDGS
19.39%
2.07%
14.30%
19.56%
N/A
N/A
CFA
16.05%
-3.02%
7.91%
16.97%
10.16%
10.53%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
BDGS vs. CFA - Expense Ratio Comparison
BDGS has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than CFA's 0.35% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
BDGS vs. CFA - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) and VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Wtd ETF (CFA). 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.
Dividends
BDGS vs. CFA - Dividend Comparison
BDGS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.31%.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF | 0.00% | 0.84% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CFA VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Wtd ETF | 1.31% | 1.42% | 1.59% | 1.04% | 1.21% | 1.35% | 1.50% | 1.14% | 1.37% | 1.31% | 0.63% |
Drawdowns
BDGS vs. CFA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BDGS drawdown since its inception was -5.38%, smaller than the maximum CFA drawdown of -37.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BDGS and CFA. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
BDGS vs. CFA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) is 1.38%, while VictoryShares US 500 Volatility Wtd ETF (CFA) has a volatility of 3.89%. This indicates that BDGS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CFA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.