BLUC vs. BDGS

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

BLUC (Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF) and BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BLUC charges 0.23%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for BDGS.

Performance

BLUC vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF (BLUC) and Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BLUC achieves a 10.68% return, which is significantly higher than BDGS's 5.56% return.

BLUC

• 1D: 0.39%
• 1M: 5.04%
• YTD: 10.68%
• 6M: 10.43%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BDGS

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: 1.33%
• YTD: 5.56%
• 6M: 5.60%
• 1Y: 13.77%
• 3Y*: 14.02%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BLUC vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BLUC Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF	10.68%	14.03%
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	5.56%	7.12%

Correlation

The correlation between BLUC and BDGS is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2025	0.83

BLUC vs. BDGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BLUC	BDGS
Technology	40.6%	37.4%
Communication Services	12.5%	16.6%
Consumer Cyclical	10.7%	10.9%
Financial Services	9.8%	9.3%
Healthcare	7.7%	7.5%
Industrials	7.3%	6.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.0%	4.1%
Energy	2.7%	2.6%
Utilities	1.7%	1.9%
Real Estate	1.6%	1.5%
Basic Materials	1.5%	1.5%

Return for Risk

BLUC vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

BDGS

BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 76
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 80
BDGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
BDGS Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

BLUC vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF (BLUC) and Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BLUC	BDGS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	2.28	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.15	1.75	+0.39

Drawdowns

BLUC vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BLUC drawdown since its inception was -10.69%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BLUC and BDGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	BLUC	BDGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.69%	-9.12%	-1.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-4.03%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-9.12%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.05%	-0.89%	-0.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.52%	-0.64%	-0.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.84%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BLUC	BDGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	1.13%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	4.74%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.98%	6.08%	+6.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.98%	8.20%	+4.78%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.98%	8.20%	+4.78%

BLUC vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

BLUC has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.87% expense ratio.

Dividends

BLUC vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison

BLUC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.51%, less than BDGS's 0.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	0.52%	0.55%	1.81%	0.84%
BLUC Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF	0.51%	0.46%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BLUC and BDGS in my portfolio?

BLUC and BDGS have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BLUC or BDGS?

On fees, BLUC is cheaper at 0.23% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BLUC or BDGS?

BLUC is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for BDGS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BLUC or BDGS?

BLUC and BDGS have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.51%.

What is the main difference between BLUC and BDGS?

They also come from different issuers: Bluemonte and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for BLUC and 0.87% for BDGS.