BGCG vs. IDHQ
BGCG (Baillie Gifford International Concentrated Growth ETF) and IDHQ (Invesco S&P International Developed High Quality ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds. BGCG is actively managed, while IDHQ is passively managed. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BGCG charges 0.72%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for IDHQ.
Performance
BGCG vs. IDHQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
BGCG
- 1D
- -2.04%
- 1M
- 0.50%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IDHQ
- 1D
- -0.25%
- 1M
- 1.40%
- 6M
- 17.71%
- YTD
- 24.14%
- 1Y
- 35.93%
- 3Y*
- 18.62%
- 5Y*
- 9.52%
- 10Y*
- 10.56%
BGCG vs. IDHQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
BGCG Baillie Gifford International Concentrated Growth ETF | -1.46% |
IDHQ Invesco S&P International Developed High Quality ETF | 4.10% |
Correlation
The correlation between BGCG and IDHQ is 0.70, 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 Jun 1, 2026 | 0.70 |
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
BGCG vs. IDHQ — Risk / Return Rank
BGCG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
IDHQ
BGCG vs. IDHQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Baillie Gifford International Concentrated Growth ETF (BGCG) and Invesco S&P International Developed High Quality ETF (IDHQ). 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.
| BGCG | IDHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.32 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.69 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 10.55 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BGCG vs. IDHQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BGCG drawdown since its inception was -5.68%, smaller than the maximum IDHQ drawdown of -73.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BGCG and IDHQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BGCG | IDHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -5.68% | -73.84% | +68.16% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -13.44% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.07% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -33.54% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.54% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.57% | -2.44% | -1.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.00% | -21.07% | +19.07% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.41% | — |
Volatility
BGCG vs. IDHQ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BGCG | IDHQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 5.73% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 18.90% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 25.59% | 20.74% | +4.85% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.59% | 17.83% | +7.76% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.59% | 17.96% | +7.63% |
BGCG vs. IDHQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
BGCG has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is higher than IDHQ's 0.29% expense ratio.
Dividends
BGCG vs. IDHQ - Dividend Comparison
BGCG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IDHQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.04%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BGCG Baillie Gifford International Concentrated Growth ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IDHQ Invesco S&P International Developed High Quality ETF | 2.04% | 2.46% | 2.41% | 2.52% | 3.33% | 2.10% | 1.60% | 2.10% | 2.67% | 1.68% | 2.36% | 1.71% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BGCG and IDHQ have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IDHQ is cheaper at 0.29% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IDHQ is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.72% for BGCG.
IDHQ has the higher dividend yield at 2.04%, compared with 0.00% for BGCG.
They also come from different issuers: Baillie Gifford and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.72% for BGCG and 0.29% for IDHQ.
Find the right allocation for BGCG and IDHQ
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