BDIV vs. GVUS
BDIV (AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF) and GVUS (Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Value Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. BDIV is actively managed, while GVUS is passively managed. Over the past year, BDIV returned 20.21% vs 28.22% for GVUS. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BDIV charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for GVUS.
Performance
BDIV vs. GVUS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BDIV achieves a 7.27% return, which is significantly lower than GVUS's 14.24% return.
BDIV
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 1.48%
- YTD
- 7.27%
- 6M
- 6.86%
- 1Y
- 20.21%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GVUS
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 4.34%
- YTD
- 14.24%
- 6M
- 14.89%
- 1Y
- 28.22%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BDIV vs. GVUS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
BDIV AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF | 7.27% | 18.59% | 3.14% |
GVUS Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Value Equity ETF | 14.24% | 15.90% | 1.87% |
Correlation
The correlation between BDIV and GVUS is 0.82, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.82 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 1, 2024 | 0.86 |
The correlation between BDIV and GVUS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.
BDIV vs. GVUS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BDIV
GVUS
Technology
Financial Services
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Utilities
Communication Services
Energy
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
Real Estate
Technology
BDIV
GVUS
Financial Services
BDIV
GVUS
Industrials
BDIV
GVUS
Healthcare
BDIV
GVUS
Consumer Defensive
BDIV
GVUS
Utilities
BDIV
GVUS
Communication Services
BDIV
GVUS
Energy
BDIV
GVUS
Consumer Cyclical
BDIV
GVUS
Basic Materials
BDIV
GVUS
Real Estate
BDIV
GVUS
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
BDIV vs. GVUS — Risk / Return Rank
BDIV
GVUS
BDIV vs. GVUS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF (BDIV) and Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Value Equity ETF (GVUS). 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.
| BDIV | GVUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.10 | 2.61 | -0.51 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.07 | 3.71 | -0.64 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | 1.47 | -0.10 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.89 | 4.24 | -1.35 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.51 | 17.70 | -6.19 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| BDIV | GVUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.10 | 2.61 | -0.51 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.20 | 1.55 | -0.36 |
Drawdowns
BDIV vs. GVUS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BDIV drawdown since its inception was -14.98%, smaller than the maximum GVUS drawdown of -15.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BDIV and GVUS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BDIV | GVUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.98% | -15.82% | +0.84% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.01% | -6.68% | -0.33% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.53% | 0.00% | -0.53% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.99% | -2.01% | +0.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.76% | 1.60% | +0.16% |
Volatility
BDIV vs. GVUS - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF (BDIV) is 2.35%, while Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Value Equity ETF (GVUS) has a volatility of 3.01%. This indicates that BDIV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GVUS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BDIV | GVUS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.35% | 3.01% | -0.66% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.22% | 8.14% | -0.92% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.69% | 10.86% | -1.17% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.41% | 13.28% | +0.13% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.41% | 13.28% | +0.13% |
BDIV vs. GVUS - Expense Ratio Comparison
BDIV has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than GVUS's 0.12% expense ratio.
Dividends
BDIV vs. GVUS - Dividend Comparison
BDIV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.59%, which matches GVUS's 1.58% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BDIV AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF | 1.59% | 1.14% | 0.62% | 0.00% |
GVUS Goldman Sachs MarketBeta Russell 1000 Value Equity ETF | 1.58% | 1.77% | 2.04% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BDIV and GVUS have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GVUS has higher volatility (3.01%) compared to BDIV (2.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BDIV dropped -14.98% vs GVUS's -15.82%.
On 1-year performance, GVUS leads with 28.22% vs 20.21% for BDIV. On fees, GVUS is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, BDIV has been the lower-risk option at 2.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, GVUS has performed better with a 28.22% return vs 20.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GVUS is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for BDIV.
BDIV and GVUS have nearly identical dividend yields, around 1.59%.
They also come from different issuers: AAM and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for BDIV and 0.12% for GVUS.
GVUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.61 vs 2.10), 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.
Find the right allocation for BDIV and GVUS
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer