BDVG vs. LVDS

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BDVG (iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF) and LVDS (JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BDVG charges 0.55%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for LVDS.

Performance

BDVG vs. LVDS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF (BDVG) and JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF (LVDS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BDVG achieves a 12.77% return, which is significantly lower than LVDS's 15.18% return.

BDVG

• 1D: 0.56%
• 1M: 2.15%
• YTD: 12.77%
• 6M: 12.09%
• 1Y: 22.84%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LVDS

• 1D: -1.20%
• 1M: 2.78%
• YTD: 15.18%
• 6M: 14.56%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BDVG vs. LVDS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BDVG iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF	12.77%	6.10%
LVDS JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF	15.18%	7.40%

Correlation

The correlation between BDVG and LVDS is 0.78, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2025	0.78

BDVG vs. LVDS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BDVG	LVDS
Industrials	18.6%	12.1%
Technology	18.2%	18.7%
Financial Services	17.0%	18.7%
Consumer Defensive	11.6%	6.4%
Energy	10.5%	6.6%
Healthcare	9.8%	10.1%
Consumer Cyclical	6.2%	8.4%
Basic Materials	3.7%	2.7%
Utilities	3.1%	4.7%
Real Estate	1.3%	4.1%
Communication Services	0.6%	7.5%

Return for Risk

BDVG vs. LVDS — Risk / Return Rank

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

BDVG

BDVG Risk / Return Rank: 76
BDVG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
BDVG Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
BDVG Omega Ratio Rank: 76
BDVG Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
BDVG Martin Ratio Rank: 74

LVDS

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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. LVDS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF (BDVG) and JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF (LVDS). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	BDVG	LVDS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.28	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.31	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.43	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.03	—	—

Drawdowns

BDVG vs. LVDS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BDVG drawdown since its inception was -14.46%, which is greater than LVDS's maximum drawdown of -6.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BDVG and LVDS.

Drawdown Indicators

	BDVG	LVDS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.46%	-6.64%	-7.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.70%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.95%	-1.20%	+0.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.32%	-0.95%	-1.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.76%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BDVG	LVDS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.78%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.77%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.08%	10.68%	-0.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.95%	10.68%	+1.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.95%	10.68%	+1.27%

BDVG vs. LVDS - Expense Ratio Comparison

BDVG has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than LVDS's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

BDVG vs. LVDS - Dividend Comparison

BDVG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.52%, less than LVDS's 7.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BDVG iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF	1.52%	1.75%	1.69%	0.95%
LVDS JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF	7.45%	8.25%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BDVG and LVDS in my portfolio?

BDVG and LVDS have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BDVG or LVDS?

On fees, LVDS is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BDVG or LVDS?

LVDS is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for BDVG.

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

LVDS has the higher dividend yield at 7.45%, compared with 1.52% for BDVG.

What is the main difference between BDVG and LVDS?

They also come from different issuers: iMGP and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for BDVG and 0.30% for LVDS.