BLGR vs. GQGU
BLGR (Bluemonte Large Cap Growth ETF) and GQGU (GQG US Equity ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Over the past year, BLGR returned 21.52% vs 5.18% for GQGU. At a correlation of -0.31, they often move in opposite directions. BLGR charges 0.24%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for GQGU.
Performance
BLGR vs. GQGU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BLGR achieves a 9.83% return, which is significantly higher than GQGU's 5.70% return.
BLGR
- 1D
- 0.54%
- 1M
- 0.53%
- 6M
- 9.99%
- YTD
- 9.83%
- 1Y
- 21.52%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GQGU
- 1D
- -0.23%
- 1M
- 0.43%
- 6M
- 4.64%
- YTD
- 5.70%
- 1Y
- 5.18%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BLGR vs. GQGU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BLGR Bluemonte Large Cap Growth ETF | 9.83% | 11.10% |
GQGU GQG US Equity ETF | 5.70% | -1.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between BLGR and GQGU is -0.31, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.31 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 14, 2025 | -0.31 |
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
BLGR vs. GQGU — Risk / Return Rank
BLGR
GQGU
BLGR vs. GQGU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bluemonte Large Cap Growth ETF (BLGR) and GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU). 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.
| BLGR | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.85 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.09 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | 1.09 | +0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.54 | 0.62 | +0.92 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.53 | 1.50 | +4.03 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BLGR vs. GQGU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BLGR drawdown since its inception was -14.08%, which is greater than GQGU's maximum drawdown of -8.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BLGR and GQGU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BLGR | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.08% | -8.41% | -5.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.08% | -8.41% | -5.67% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.84% | -5.46% | +3.62% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.56% | -2.90% | +0.34% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.90% | 3.46% | +0.44% |
Volatility
BLGR vs. GQGU - Volatility Comparison
Bluemonte Large Cap Growth ETF (BLGR) has a higher volatility of 5.33% compared to GQG US Equity ETF (GQGU) at 4.50%. This indicates that BLGR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GQGU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BLGR | GQGU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.33% | 4.50% | +0.83% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.03% | 8.53% | +4.50% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.21% | 10.73% | +5.48% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.97% | 10.71% | +5.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.97% | 10.71% | +5.26% |
BLGR vs. GQGU - Expense Ratio Comparison
BLGR has a 0.24% expense ratio, which is lower than GQGU's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
BLGR vs. GQGU - Dividend Comparison
BLGR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.32%, less than GQGU's 0.96% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
BLGR Bluemonte Large Cap Growth ETF | 0.32% | 0.17% |
GQGU GQG US Equity ETF | 0.96% | 1.02% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BLGR and GQGU have a correlation of -0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BLGR has higher volatility (5.33%) compared to GQGU (4.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BLGR dropped -14.08% vs GQGU's -8.41%.
On 1-year performance, BLGR leads with 21.52% vs 5.18% for GQGU. On fees, BLGR is cheaper at 0.24% per year. On volatility, GQGU has been the lower-risk option at 4.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, BLGR has performed better with a 21.52% return vs 5.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BLGR is cheaper with a 0.24% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for GQGU.
GQGU has the higher dividend yield at 0.96%, compared with 0.32% for BLGR.
They also come from different issuers: Bluemonte and GQG Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.24% for BLGR and 0.49% for GQGU.
BLGR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.33 vs 0.49), 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 BLGR and GQGU
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