BGLD vs. IGLD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BGLD (FT Vest Gold Strategy Quarterly Buffer ETF) and IGLD (FT Cboe Vest Gold Strategy Target Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BGLD is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by FT Vest, while IGLD is a Precious Metals fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, BGLD returned 11.20%/yr vs 13.02%/yr for IGLD. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BGLD charges 0.91%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for IGLD.

Performance

BGLD vs. IGLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Gold Strategy Quarterly Buffer ETF (BGLD) and FT Cboe Vest Gold Strategy Target Income ETF (IGLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BGLD achieves a 0.32% return, which is significantly lower than IGLD's 1.69% return.

BGLD

• 1D: -0.52%
• 1M: 0.80%
• YTD: 0.32%
• 6M: 1.34%
• 1Y: 12.93%
• 3Y*: 19.37%
• 5Y*: 11.20%
• 10Y*: —

IGLD

• 1D: -0.81%
• 1M: -1.33%
• YTD: 1.69%
• 6M: 4.44%
• 1Y: 24.53%
• 3Y*: 23.01%
• 5Y*: 13.02%
• 10Y*: —

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

BGLD vs. IGLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BGLD FT Vest Gold Strategy Quarterly Buffer ETF	0.32%	33.03%	21.80%	13.24%	-2.42%	-0.09%
IGLD FT Cboe Vest Gold Strategy Target Income ETF	1.69%	47.46%	19.36%	9.24%	-2.34%	4.30%

Correlation

The correlation between BGLD and IGLD 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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.70
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 4, 2021	0.76

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

Return for Risk

BGLD vs. IGLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

BGLD

BGLD Risk / Return Rank: 28
BGLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
BGLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
BGLD Omega Ratio Rank: 31
BGLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
BGLD Martin Ratio Rank: 27

IGLD

IGLD Risk / Return Rank: 28
IGLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
IGLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
IGLD Omega Ratio Rank: 32
IGLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
IGLD Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

BGLD vs. IGLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Gold Strategy Quarterly Buffer ETF (BGLD) and FT Cboe Vest Gold Strategy Target Income ETF (IGLD). 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.

	BGLD	IGLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.09	1.06	+0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.51	1.47	+0.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.22	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.17	1.40	-0.23
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.72	3.82	-0.11
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BGLD vs. IGLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BGLD Sharpe Ratio is 1.09, which is comparable to the IGLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BGLD and IGLD, 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

	BGLD	IGLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.09	1.06	+0.03
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.13	0.86	+0.27
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.05	0.94	+0.11

Drawdowns

BGLD vs. IGLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BGLD drawdown since its inception was -16.19%, smaller than the maximum IGLD drawdown of -18.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BGLD and IGLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	BGLD	IGLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.19%	-18.59%	+2.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.11%	-17.56%	+6.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.11%	-17.56%	+6.45%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.52%	-18.59%	+3.07%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.22%	-15.16%	+7.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.64%	-5.24%	+1.60%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.49%	6.43%	-2.94%

Volatility

BGLD vs. IGLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest Gold Strategy Quarterly Buffer ETF (BGLD) is 2.20%, while FT Cboe Vest Gold Strategy Target Income ETF (IGLD) has a volatility of 5.12%. This indicates that BGLD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IGLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BGLD	IGLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.20%	5.12%	-2.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.04%	21.01%	-10.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.90%	23.24%	-11.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.97%	15.17%	-5.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.89%	15.00%	-5.11%

BGLD vs. IGLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

BGLD has a 0.91% expense ratio, which is higher than IGLD's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

BGLD vs. IGLD - Dividend Comparison

BGLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 44.18%, more than IGLD's 17.92% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BGLD FT Vest Gold Strategy Quarterly Buffer ETF	44.18%	44.32%	25.04%	10.49%	0.40%	0.00%
IGLD FT Cboe Vest Gold Strategy Target Income ETF	17.92%	9.91%	20.81%	7.85%	4.45%	2.24%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BGLD and IGLD in my portfolio?

BGLD and IGLD 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.

Which is riskier, BGLD or IGLD?

IGLD has higher volatility (5.12%) compared to BGLD (2.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BGLD dropped -16.19% vs IGLD's -18.59%.

Which ETF is better, BGLD or IGLD?

On 5-year performance, IGLD leads with 13.02% vs 11.20% for BGLD. On fees, IGLD is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, BGLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BGLD or IGLD?

Over the 5-year period, IGLD has performed better with a 13.02% return vs 11.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BGLD or IGLD?

IGLD is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.91% for BGLD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BGLD or IGLD?

BGLD has the higher dividend yield at 44.18%, compared with 17.92% for IGLD.

What is the main difference between BGLD and IGLD?

BGLD is categorized as Defined Outcome, while IGLD is Precious Metals. They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.91% for BGLD and 0.85% for IGLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BGLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.09 vs 1.06), 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.