BRES vs. GXLC

Last updated Jul 8, 2026

BRES (Burney U.S. Equity Select ETF) and GXLC (Global X U.S. 500 ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. BRES is actively managed, while GXLC is passively managed. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BRES charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.02%/yr for GXLC.

Performance

BRES vs. GXLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Burney U.S. Equity Select ETF (BRES) and Global X U.S. 500 ETF (GXLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

BRES

• 1D: -0.48%
• 1M: 4.64%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GXLC

• 1D: -0.49%
• 1M: 1.62%
• 6M: 8.69%
• YTD: 10.26%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BRES vs. GXLC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
BRES Burney U.S. Equity Select ETF	9.57%
GXLC Global X U.S. 500 ETF	10.01%

Correlation

The correlation between BRES and GXLC is 0.93, 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 Feb 5, 2026	0.93

Return for Risk

BRES vs. GXLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Burney U.S. Equity Select ETF (BRES) and Global X U.S. 500 ETF (GXLC). 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.

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

Drawdowns

BRES vs. GXLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BRES drawdown since its inception was -9.14%, roughly equal to the maximum GXLC drawdown of -9.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BRES and GXLC.

Drawdown Indicators

	BRES	GXLC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.14%	-9.08%	-0.06%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.48%	-1.31%	+0.83%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.87%	-1.57%	-0.30%

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BRES	GXLC	Difference
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.72%	13.68%	+2.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.72%	13.68%	+2.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.72%	13.68%	+2.04%

BRES vs. GXLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

BRES has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than GXLC's 0.02% expense ratio.

Dividends

BRES vs. GXLC - Dividend Comparison

BRES's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.16%, less than GXLC's 0.63% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
BRES Burney U.S. Equity Select ETF	0.16%	0.00%
GXLC Global X U.S. 500 ETF	0.63%	0.30%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BRES and GXLC in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, BRES and GXLC move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, BRES or GXLC?

On fees, GXLC is cheaper at 0.02% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BRES or GXLC?

GXLC is cheaper with a 0.02% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for BRES.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BRES or GXLC?

GXLC has the higher dividend yield at 0.63%, compared with 0.16% for BRES.

What is the main difference between BRES and GXLC?

They also come from different issuers: Burney and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for BRES and 0.02% for GXLC.