BDGS vs. JCTR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) and JCTR (JPMorgan Carbon Transition U.S. Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. BDGS is actively managed, while JCTR is passively managed. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BDGS charges 0.87%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for JCTR.

Performance

BDGS vs. JCTR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) and JPMorgan Carbon Transition U.S. Equity ETF (JCTR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

BDGS

• 1D: -0.29%
• 1M: 1.26%
• YTD: 5.64%
• 6M: 5.65%
• 1Y: 13.85%
• 3Y*: 14.06%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

JCTR

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BDGS vs. JCTR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	5.64%	10.61%	19.07%	8.31%
JCTR JPMorgan Carbon Transition U.S. Equity ETF	0.00%	13.55%	24.74%	17.97%

Correlation

The correlation between BDGS and JCTR is 0.35, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.35
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.65
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2023	0.65

Over the past year, the correlation between BDGS and JCTR has dropped to 0.35 - well below their long-term average of 0.65, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

BDGS vs. JCTR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BDGS	JCTR
Technology	37.4%	37.2%
Communication Services	16.6%	9.5%
Consumer Cyclical	10.9%	10.9%
Financial Services	9.3%	14.7%
Healthcare	7.5%	9.5%
Industrials	6.6%	6.3%
Consumer Defensive	4.1%	2.9%
Energy	2.6%	2.9%
Utilities	1.9%	2.0%
Real Estate	1.5%	2.3%
Basic Materials	1.5%	1.7%

Return for Risk

BDGS vs. JCTR — Risk / Return Rank

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

BDGS

BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 74
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 78
BDGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
BDGS Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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. JCTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) and JPMorgan Carbon Transition U.S. Equity ETF (JCTR). 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	JCTR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.29	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.40	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.45	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.47	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BDGS	JCTR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.29	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.76	—	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	BDGS	JCTR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.12%	—	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.03%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.12%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.83%	—	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.64%	—	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.84%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BDGS	JCTR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.14%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.74%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.08%	—	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.21%	—	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.21%	—	—

BDGS vs. JCTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

BDGS has a 0.87% expense ratio, which is higher than JCTR's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

BDGS vs. JCTR - Dividend Comparison

BDGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.52%, more than JCTR's 0.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	0.52%	0.55%	1.81%	0.84%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
JCTR JPMorgan Carbon Transition U.S. Equity ETF	0.43%	0.61%	1.04%	1.88%	1.53%	1.13%	0.13%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BDGS and JCTR in my portfolio?

BDGS and JCTR have a correlation of 0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BDGS or JCTR?

On fees, JCTR is cheaper at 0.15% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BDGS or JCTR?

JCTR is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for BDGS.

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

BDGS has the higher dividend yield at 0.52%, compared with 0.43% for JCTR.

What is the main difference between BDGS and JCTR?

They also come from different issuers: Bridges and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 0.87% for BDGS and 0.15% for JCTR.