BDVG vs. FUNL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BDVG (iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF) and FUNL (CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BDVG returned 23.93% vs 18.97% for FUNL. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BDVG charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for FUNL.

Performance

BDVG vs. FUNL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF (BDVG) and CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL (FUNL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BDVG achieves a 12.71% return, which is significantly higher than FUNL's 5.66% return.

BDVG

• 1D: -0.40%
• 1M: 6.92%
• YTD: 12.71%
• 6M: 12.51%
• 1Y: 23.93%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FUNL

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 5.66%
• 6M: 7.22%
• 1Y: 18.97%
• 3Y*: 16.53%
• 5Y*: 9.42%
• 10Y*: —

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

BDVG vs. FUNL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BDVG iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF	12.71%	13.81%	11.75%	3.25%
FUNL CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL	5.66%	14.62%	15.55%	9.13%

Correlation

The correlation between BDVG and FUNL is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 3, 2023	0.82

The correlation between BDVG and FUNL shifts across timeframes, from 0.69 (1 year) to 0.82 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BDVG vs. FUNL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BDVG	FUNL
Industrials	18.6%	11.5%
Technology	18.2%	14.6%
Financial Services	17.0%	19.3%
Consumer Defensive	11.6%	7.0%
Energy	10.5%	7.6%
Healthcare	9.8%	15.3%
Consumer Cyclical	6.2%	6.5%
Basic Materials	3.7%	2.2%
Utilities	3.1%	5.0%
Real Estate	1.3%	4.5%
Communication Services	0.6%	5.8%

Return for Risk

BDVG vs. FUNL — Risk / Return Rank

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

BDVG

BDVG Risk / Return Rank: 74
BDVG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
BDVG Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
BDVG Omega Ratio Rank: 73
BDVG Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
BDVG Martin Ratio Rank: 74

FUNL

FUNL Risk / Return Rank: 80
FUNL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
FUNL Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
FUNL Omega Ratio Rank: 79
FUNL Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
FUNL Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

BDVG vs. FUNL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF (BDVG) and CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL (FUNL). 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.

	BDVG	FUNL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.42	2.19	+0.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.50	3.26	+0.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.47	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.59	5.01	-1.42
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.81	23.31	-9.50
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BDVG vs. FUNL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BDVG Sharpe Ratio is 2.42, which is comparable to the FUNL Sharpe Ratio of 2.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BDVG and FUNL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BDVG	FUNL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.42	2.19	+0.23
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.63	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.21	0.95	+0.26

Drawdowns

BDVG vs. FUNL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BDVG drawdown since its inception was -14.46%, smaller than the maximum FUNL drawdown of -19.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BDVG and FUNL.

Drawdown Indicators

	BDVG	FUNL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.46%	-19.35%	+4.89%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.70%	-3.83%	-2.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.37%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.35%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.40%	-0.12%	-0.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.35%	-3.54%	+1.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.74%	0.82%	+0.92%

Volatility

BDVG vs. FUNL - Volatility Comparison

iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF (BDVG) has a higher volatility of 3.19% compared to CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL (FUNL) at 0.00%. This indicates that BDVG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FUNL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BDVG	FUNL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.19%	0.00%	+3.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.52%	5.24%	+2.28%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.96%	8.82%	+1.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.95%	15.16%	-3.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.95%	15.29%	-3.34%

BDVG vs. FUNL - Expense Ratio Comparison

BDVG has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than FUNL's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

BDVG vs. FUNL - Dividend Comparison

BDVG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.52%, less than FUNL's 2.25% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BDVG iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF	1.52%	1.75%	1.69%	0.95%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FUNL CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL	2.25%	2.10%	1.78%	1.69%	1.84%	1.55%	0.45%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BDVG and FUNL in my portfolio?

BDVG and FUNL have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BDVG or FUNL?

BDVG has higher volatility (3.19%) compared to FUNL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BDVG dropped -14.46% vs FUNL's -19.35%.

Which ETF is better, BDVG or FUNL?

On 1-year performance, BDVG leads with 23.93% vs 18.97% for FUNL. On fees, FUNL is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, FUNL has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BDVG or FUNL?

Over the 1-year period, BDVG has performed better with a 23.93% return vs 18.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BDVG or FUNL?

FUNL is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for BDVG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BDVG or FUNL?

FUNL has the higher dividend yield at 2.25%, compared with 1.52% for BDVG.

What is the main difference between BDVG and FUNL?

They also come from different issuers: iMGP and CornerCap. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for BDVG and 0.50% for FUNL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BDVG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.42 vs 2.19), 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.