PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BDVG vs. ROE
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BDVG vs. ROE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF (BDVG) and Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF (ROE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BDVG achieves a 12.71% return, which is significantly lower than ROE's 20.98% return.


BDVG

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

ROE

1D
-0.04%
1M
8.10%
YTD
20.98%
6M
21.56%
1Y
37.99%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BDVG vs. ROE - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
BDVG
iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF
12.71%13.81%11.75%0.99%
ROE
Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF
20.98%17.20%18.34%4.29%

Correlation

The correlation between BDVG and ROE is 0.68, 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

0.68

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 2, 2023

0.76

The correlation between BDVG and ROE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

BDVG vs. ROE - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BDVG
ROE

Industrials

18.6%
9.8%

Technology

18.2%
36.1%

Financial Services

17.0%
11.7%

Consumer Defensive

11.6%
4.7%

Energy

10.5%
3.5%

Healthcare

9.8%
8.7%

Consumer Cyclical

6.2%
9.4%

Basic Materials

3.7%
1.8%

Utilities

3.1%
1.9%

Real Estate

1.3%
1.9%

Communication Services

0.6%
10.6%

Industrials

BDVG
18.6%
ROE
9.8%

Technology

BDVG
18.2%
ROE
36.1%

Financial Services

BDVG
17.0%
ROE
11.7%

Consumer Defensive

BDVG
11.6%
ROE
4.7%

Energy

BDVG
10.5%
ROE
3.5%

Healthcare

BDVG
9.8%
ROE
8.7%

Consumer Cyclical

BDVG
6.2%
ROE
9.4%

Basic Materials

BDVG
3.7%
ROE
1.8%

Utilities

BDVG
3.1%
ROE
1.9%

Real Estate

BDVG
1.3%
ROE
1.9%

Communication Services

BDVG
0.6%
ROE
10.6%

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

BDVG vs. ROE — Risk / Return Rank

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

BDVG
BDVG Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
BDVG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BDVG Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
BDVG Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
BDVG Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
BDVG Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
Martin Ratio Rank

ROE
ROE Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
ROE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ROE Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
ROE Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
ROE Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
ROE Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank
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. ROE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF (BDVG) and Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF (ROE). 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.


BDVGROEDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.33

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.19

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.44

1.48

-0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.59

4.41

-0.82

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.81

19.92

-6.11

BDVG vs. ROE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BDVG Sharpe Ratio is 2.42, which is comparable to the ROE Sharpe Ratio of 2.74. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BDVG and ROE, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BDVGROEDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.42

2.74

-0.33

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.21

1.39

-0.18

Drawdowns

BDVG vs. ROE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BDVG drawdown since its inception was -14.46%, smaller than the maximum ROE drawdown of -19.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BDVG and ROE.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BDVGROEDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-14.46%

-19.10%

+4.64%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.70%

-8.66%

+1.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.40%

-0.04%

-0.36%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.35%

-2.59%

+0.24%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.74%

1.91%

-0.17%

Volatility

BDVG vs. ROE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF (BDVG) is 3.19%, while Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF (ROE) has a volatility of 3.79%. This indicates that BDVG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ROE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BDVGROEDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.19%

3.79%

-0.60%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.52%

10.66%

-3.14%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.96%

13.94%

-3.98%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.95%

15.78%

-3.83%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.95%

15.78%

-3.83%

BDVG vs. ROE - Expense Ratio Comparison

BDVG has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is higher than ROE's 0.49% expense ratio.


Dividends

BDVG vs. ROE - Dividend Comparison

BDVG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.52%, more than ROE's 0.94% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
BDVG
iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF
1.52%1.75%1.69%0.95%
ROE
Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF
0.94%0.97%1.18%0.68%

Frequently Asked Questions


BDVG and ROE have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ROE has higher volatility (3.79%) compared to BDVG (3.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BDVG dropped -14.46% vs ROE's -19.10%.

On 1-year performance, ROE leads with 37.99% vs 23.93% for BDVG. On fees, ROE is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, BDVG has been the lower-risk option at 3.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, ROE has performed better with a 37.99% return vs 23.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ROE is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for BDVG.

BDVG has the higher dividend yield at 1.52%, compared with 0.94% for ROE.

They also come from different issuers: iMGP and Astoria. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for BDVG and 0.49% for ROE.

ROE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.74 vs 2.42), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BDVG and ROE

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