BGIA vs. UMMA

Last updated Jul 4, 2026

BGIA (Baillie Gifford International Alpha ETF) and UMMA (Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BGIA charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for UMMA.

Performance

BGIA vs. UMMA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Baillie Gifford International Alpha ETF (BGIA) and Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

BGIA

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: -1.54%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

UMMA

• 1D: -0.95%
• 1M: -3.34%
• 6M: 25.31%
• YTD: 28.06%
• 1Y: 42.83%
• 3Y*: 20.93%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BGIA vs. UMMA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
BGIA Baillie Gifford International Alpha ETF	-2.53%
UMMA Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF	-4.09%

Correlation

The correlation between BGIA and UMMA is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 3, 2026	0.90

Return for Risk

BGIA vs. UMMA — Risk / Return Rank

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

BGIA

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

UMMA

UMMA Risk / Return Rank: 69
UMMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
UMMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
UMMA Omega Ratio Rank: 69
UMMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
UMMA Martin Ratio Rank: 72

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.

BGIA vs. UMMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Baillie Gifford International Alpha ETF (BGIA) and Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF (UMMA). 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.

	BGIA	UMMA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.86	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.45	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.34	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	2.88	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	10.86	—

Drawdowns

BGIA vs. UMMA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BGIA drawdown since its inception was -4.88%, smaller than the maximum UMMA drawdown of -34.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BGIA and UMMA.

Drawdown Indicators

	BGIA	UMMA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.88%	-34.17%	+29.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-14.93%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-18.73%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.23%	-6.14%	+2.91%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.34%	-9.69%	+7.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	3.95%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BGIA	UMMA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	12.39%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	20.85%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.16%	23.16%	+2.00%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.16%	21.14%	+4.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.16%	21.14%	+4.02%

BGIA vs. UMMA - Expense Ratio Comparison

BGIA has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than UMMA's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

BGIA vs. UMMA - Dividend Comparison

BGIA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while UMMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.95%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BGIA Baillie Gifford International Alpha ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
UMMA Wahed Dow Jones Islamic World ETF	0.95%	1.02%	0.91%	1.09%	1.77%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BGIA and UMMA in my portfolio?

BGIA and UMMA have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BGIA or UMMA?

On fees, BGIA is cheaper at 0.59% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BGIA or UMMA?

BGIA is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for UMMA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BGIA or UMMA?

UMMA has the higher dividend yield at 0.95%, compared with 0.00% for BGIA.

What is the main difference between BGIA and UMMA?

They also come from different issuers: Baillie Gifford and Wahed. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for BGIA and 0.65% for UMMA.