BKDV vs. BDIV

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

BKDV (BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF) and BDIV (AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BKDV returned 29.90% vs 22.08% for BDIV. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BKDV charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for BDIV.

Performance

BKDV vs. BDIV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF (BKDV) and AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF (BDIV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BKDV achieves a 15.37% return, which is significantly higher than BDIV's 8.25% return.

BKDV

• 1D: 0.48%
• 1M: 2.42%
• YTD: 15.37%
• 6M: 14.67%
• 1Y: 29.90%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BDIV

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: 0.46%
• YTD: 8.25%
• 6M: 8.18%
• 1Y: 22.08%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BKDV vs. BDIV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BKDV BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF	15.37%	18.58%	-0.91%
BDIV AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF	8.25%	18.59%	-0.43%

Correlation

The correlation between BKDV and BDIV is 0.78, 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	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 4, 2024	0.83

The correlation between BKDV and BDIV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

BKDV vs. BDIV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BKDV	BDIV
Financial Services	21.7%	14.7%
Technology	15.8%	22.6%
Healthcare	14.5%	10.3%
Industrials	12.5%	13.1%
Energy	7.8%	5.9%
Consumer Cyclical	7.8%	4.6%
Communication Services	6.9%	6.5%
Consumer Defensive	6.3%	7.7%
Basic Materials	4.1%	4.5%
Utilities	1.5%	6.8%
Real Estate	1.2%	3.3%

Return for Risk

BKDV vs. BDIV — Risk / Return Rank

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

BKDV

BKDV Risk / Return Rank: 81
BKDV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
BKDV Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
BKDV Omega Ratio Rank: 77
BKDV Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
BKDV Martin Ratio Rank: 83

BDIV

BDIV Risk / Return Rank: 72
BDIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
BDIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
BDIV Omega Ratio Rank: 72
BDIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
BDIV Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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.

BKDV vs. BDIV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF (BKDV) and AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF (BDIV). 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.

	BKDV	BDIV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.44	2.29	+0.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.39	3.32	+0.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.41	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.52	3.16	+1.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.43	12.57	+3.86

BKDV vs. BDIV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BKDV Sharpe Ratio is 2.44, which is comparable to the BDIV Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BKDV and BDIV, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BKDV vs. BDIV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BKDV drawdown since its inception was -15.49%, roughly equal to the maximum BDIV drawdown of -14.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BKDV and BDIV.

Drawdown Indicators

	BKDV	BDIV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.49%	-14.98%	-0.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.65%	-7.01%	+0.36%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.51%	-0.79%	+0.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.34%	-1.95%	-0.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.82%	1.76%	+0.06%

Volatility

BKDV vs. BDIV - Volatility Comparison

BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF (BKDV) has a higher volatility of 4.25% compared to AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF (BDIV) at 2.49%. This indicates that BKDV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BDIV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BKDV	BDIV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.25%	2.49%	+1.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.50%	7.32%	+2.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.31%	9.72%	+2.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.72%	13.31%	+2.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.72%	13.31%	+2.41%

BKDV vs. BDIV - Expense Ratio Comparison

BKDV has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than BDIV's 0.49% expense ratio.

Dividends

BKDV vs. BDIV - Dividend Comparison

BKDV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%, less than BDIV's 1.57% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BDIV AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF	1.57%	1.14%	0.62%
BKDV BNY Mellon Dynamic Value ETF	0.53%	0.62%	0.27%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BKDV and BDIV in my portfolio?

BKDV and BDIV have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BKDV or BDIV?

BKDV has higher volatility (4.25%) compared to BDIV (2.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BKDV dropped -15.49% vs BDIV's -14.98%.

Which ETF is better, BKDV or BDIV?

On 1-year performance, BKDV leads with 29.90% vs 22.08% for BDIV. On fees, BDIV is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, BDIV has been the lower-risk option at 2.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BKDV or BDIV?

Over the 1-year period, BKDV has performed better with a 29.90% return vs 22.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BKDV or BDIV?

BDIV is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for BKDV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BKDV or BDIV?

BDIV has the higher dividend yield at 1.57%, compared with 0.53% for BKDV.

What is the main difference between BKDV and BDIV?

They also come from different issuers: BNY Mellon and AAM. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for BKDV and 0.49% for BDIV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BKDV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.44 vs 2.29), 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.