BGS vs. BCSF
BGS (B&G Foods, Inc.) and BCSF (Bain Capital Specialty Finance, Inc.) are both stocks. BGS operates in Packaged Foods (Consumer Defensive), while BCSF operates in Asset Management (Financial Services). Over the past 5 years, BGS returned -27.53%/yr vs 6.89%/yr for BCSF. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
BGS vs. BCSF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BGS achieves a -5.79% return, which is significantly lower than BCSF's -4.81% return.
BGS
- 1D
- -1.27%
- 1M
- -27.51%
- YTD
- -5.79%
- 6M
- -6.44%
- 1Y
- 9.87%
- 3Y*
- -25.57%
- 5Y*
- -27.53%
- 10Y*
- -14.98%
BCSF
- 1D
- -3.33%
- 1M
- -8.32%
- YTD
- -4.81%
- 6M
- -4.10%
- 1Y
- -5.05%
- 3Y*
- 12.24%
- 5Y*
- 6.89%
- 10Y*
- —
BGS vs. BCSF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BGS B&G Foods, Inc. | -5.79% | -26.81% | -28.30% | 0.33% | -60.70% | 17.69% | 67.73% | -31.93% | -2.72% |
BCSF Bain Capital Specialty Finance, Inc. | -4.81% | -9.60% | 29.52% | 41.95% | -13.31% | 36.98% | -28.91% | 28.19% | -4.60% |
Correlation
The correlation between BGS and BCSF is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 16, 2018 | 0.14 |
Fundamentals
BGS:
$312.79M
BCSF:
$829.67M
BGS:
-$0.96
BCSF:
$1.50
BGS:
0.17
BCSF:
3.50
BGS:
0.78
BCSF:
0.76
BGS:
$1.81B
BCSF:
$237.34M
BGS:
$388.44M
BCSF:
$150.81M
BGS:
$91.70M
BCSF:
-$29.62M
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
BGS vs. BCSF — Risk / Return Rank
BGS
BCSF
BGS vs. BCSF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for B&G Foods, Inc. (BGS) and Bain Capital Specialty Finance, Inc. (BCSF). 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.
| BGS | BCSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.42 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.91 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.08 | 0.98 | +0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.32 | -0.31 | +0.63 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.94 | -0.65 | +1.59 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| BGS | BCSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.19 | -0.23 | +0.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.56 | 0.34 | -0.90 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.32 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.01 | 0.22 | -0.20 |
Drawdowns
BGS vs. BCSF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BGS drawdown since its inception was -86.50%, which is greater than BCSF's maximum drawdown of -62.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BGS and BCSF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BGS | BCSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -86.50% | -62.42% | -24.08% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -30.99% | -16.17% | -14.82% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -67.36% | -26.38% | -40.98% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -84.68% | -26.38% | -58.30% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -86.50% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -84.50% | -20.94% | -63.56% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -32.01% | -12.27% | -19.74% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.53% | 7.79% | +2.74% |
Volatility
BGS vs. BCSF - Volatility Comparison
B&G Foods, Inc. (BGS) has a higher volatility of 16.09% compared to Bain Capital Specialty Finance, Inc. (BCSF) at 7.83%. This indicates that BGS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BCSF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BGS | BCSF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 16.09% | 7.83% | +8.26% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 33.64% | 17.95% | +15.69% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 51.69% | 21.96% | +29.73% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 49.31% | 20.37% | +28.94% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 46.29% | 31.05% | +15.24% |
Dividends
BGS vs. BCSF - Dividend Comparison
BGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 19.49%, more than BCSF's 15.01% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BCSF Bain Capital Specialty Finance, Inc. | 15.01% | 14.02% | 10.27% | 10.62% | 11.60% | 8.94% | 11.73% | 8.30% | 2.44% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
BGS B&G Foods, Inc. | 19.49% | 17.67% | 11.03% | 7.24% | 14.48% | 6.18% | 6.85% | 10.60% | 6.54% | 5.29% | 3.94% | 3.94% |
Financials
BGS vs. BCSF - Financials Comparison
This section allows you to compare key financial metrics between B&G Foods, Inc. and Bain Capital Specialty Finance, Inc.. You can select fields from income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow statements to easily visualize and compare the financial health of both companies.
Total Revenue: Total amount of money received from sales and other business activities
BGS vs. BCSF - Profitability Comparison
BGS - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, B&G Foods, Inc. reported a gross profit of 79.89M and revenue of 408.94M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 19.5%.
BCSF - Gross Margin
Gross margin is calculated as gross profit divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Bain Capital Specialty Finance, Inc. reported a gross profit of 0.00 and revenue of 50.13M. Therefore, the gross margin over that period was 0.0%.
BGS - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, B&G Foods, Inc. reported an operating income of -10.96M and revenue of 408.94M, resulting in an operating margin of -2.7%.
BCSF - Operating Margin
Operating margin is calculated as operating income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Bain Capital Specialty Finance, Inc. reported an operating income of 0.00 and revenue of 50.13M, resulting in an operating margin of 0.0%.
BGS - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, B&G Foods, Inc. reported a net income of -32.54M and revenue of 408.94M, resulting in a net margin of -8.0%.
BCSF - Net Margin
Net margin is calculated as net income divided by revenue. For the three months ending on Jun 2026, Bain Capital Specialty Finance, Inc. reported a net income of 27.36M and revenue of 50.13M, resulting in a net margin of 54.6%.
Frequently Asked Questions
BGS and BCSF have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BGS has higher volatility (16.09%) compared to BCSF (7.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BGS dropped -86.50% vs BCSF's -62.42%.
BGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.19 vs -0.23), 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.
Find the right allocation for BGS and BCSF
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