BKCG vs. QWLD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BKCG (BNY Mellon Concentrated Growth ETF) and QWLD (SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. BKCG is actively managed, while QWLD is passively managed. Over the past year, BKCG returned 13.80% vs 17.09% for QWLD. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BKCG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for QWLD.

Performance

BKCG vs. QWLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in BNY Mellon Concentrated Growth ETF (BKCG) and SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BKCG achieves a 4.02% return, which is significantly lower than QWLD's 6.55% return.

BKCG

• 1D: -1.19%
• 1M: 1.33%
• YTD: 4.02%
• 6M: 4.51%
• 1Y: 13.80%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QWLD

• 1D: -0.56%
• 1M: 2.55%
• YTD: 6.55%
• 6M: 7.32%
• 1Y: 17.09%
• 3Y*: 16.35%
• 5Y*: 9.96%
• 10Y*: 11.68%

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

BKCG vs. QWLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BKCG BNY Mellon Concentrated Growth ETF	4.02%	18.56%
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	6.55%	14.38%

Correlation

The correlation between BKCG and QWLD is 0.79, 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	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2025	0.79

The correlation between BKCG and QWLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

BKCG vs. QWLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BKCG	QWLD
Technology	37.8%	22.3%
Financial Services	19.5%	13.8%
Communication Services	12.8%	9.6%
Consumer Cyclical	11.6%	5.0%
Industrials	9.2%	8.6%
Healthcare	6.2%	12.6%
Consumer Defensive	2.9%	7.6%
Basic Materials	-	2.9%
Energy	-	4.5%
Real Estate	-	0.8%
Utilities	-	3.7%

Return for Risk

BKCG vs. QWLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

BKCG

BKCG Risk / Return Rank: 29
BKCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
BKCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
BKCG Omega Ratio Rank: 29
BKCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
BKCG Martin Ratio Rank: 32

QWLD

QWLD Risk / Return Rank: 50
QWLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
QWLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
QWLD Omega Ratio Rank: 49
QWLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
QWLD Martin Ratio Rank: 55

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.

BKCG vs. QWLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BNY Mellon Concentrated Growth ETF (BKCG) and SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD). 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.

	BKCG	QWLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.05	1.77	-0.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.51	2.55	-1.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.31	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.14	2.24	-1.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.65	9.70	-5.05
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BKCG vs. QWLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BKCG Sharpe Ratio is 1.05, which is lower than the QWLD Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BKCG and QWLD, 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

	BKCG	QWLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.05	1.77	-0.72
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.74	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.77	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.09	0.69	+0.40

Drawdowns

BKCG vs. QWLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BKCG drawdown since its inception was -12.12%, smaller than the maximum QWLD drawdown of -31.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BKCG and QWLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	BKCG	QWLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.12%	-31.89%	+19.77%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.12%	-7.66%	-4.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-12.40%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-22.84%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-31.89%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.09%	-0.56%	-1.53%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.97%	-3.71%	+1.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.97%	1.77%	+1.20%

Volatility

BKCG vs. QWLD - Volatility Comparison

BNY Mellon Concentrated Growth ETF (BKCG) has a higher volatility of 3.38% compared to SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD) at 2.26%. This indicates that BKCG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QWLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BKCG	QWLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.38%	2.26%	+1.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.37%	7.51%	+2.86%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.19%	9.68%	+3.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.03%	13.53%	+4.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.03%	15.18%	+2.85%

BKCG vs. QWLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

BKCG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than QWLD's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

BKCG vs. QWLD - Dividend Comparison

BKCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.78%, less than QWLD's 1.84% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BKCG BNY Mellon Concentrated Growth ETF	0.78%	0.45%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QWLD SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF	1.84%	1.85%	1.74%	1.78%	2.02%	1.77%	1.77%	2.13%	2.33%	2.73%	2.22%	3.42%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BKCG and QWLD in my portfolio?

BKCG and QWLD have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BKCG or QWLD?

BKCG has higher volatility (3.38%) compared to QWLD (2.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BKCG dropped -12.12% vs QWLD's -31.89%.

Which ETF is better, BKCG or QWLD?

On 1-year performance, QWLD leads with 17.09% vs 13.80% for BKCG. On fees, QWLD is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, QWLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BKCG or QWLD?

Over the 1-year period, QWLD has performed better with a 17.09% return vs 13.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BKCG or QWLD?

QWLD is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for BKCG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BKCG or QWLD?

QWLD has the higher dividend yield at 1.84%, compared with 0.78% for BKCG.

What is the main difference between BKCG and QWLD?

They also come from different issuers: BNY Mellon and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for BKCG and 0.30% for QWLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QWLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs 1.05), 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.