CVLC vs. BDGS

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

CVLC (Calvert US Large-Cap Core Responsible Index ETF) and BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. CVLC is passively managed, while BDGS is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CVLC returned 22.60%/yr vs 14.17%/yr for BDGS. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CVLC charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for BDGS.

Performance

CVLC vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calvert US Large-Cap Core Responsible Index ETF (CVLC) 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, CVLC achieves a 13.18% return, which is significantly higher than BDGS's 5.94% return.

CVLC

• 1D: 0.32%
• 1M: 6.11%
• YTD: 13.18%
• 6M: 13.39%
• 1Y: 31.25%
• 3Y*: 22.60%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BDGS

• 1D: -0.30%
• 1M: 1.49%
• YTD: 5.94%
• 6M: 5.90%
• 1Y: 14.42%
• 3Y*: 14.17%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CVLC vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CVLC Calvert US Large-Cap Core Responsible Index ETF	13.18%	16.13%	24.20%	17.59%
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	5.94%	10.61%	19.07%	8.31%

Correlation

The correlation between CVLC and BDGS is 0.76, 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	0.76
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2023	0.76

The correlation between CVLC and BDGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

CVLC vs. BDGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CVLC	BDGS
Technology	39.5%	37.4%
Financial Services	11.8%	9.3%
Industrials	9.9%	6.6%
Healthcare	9.1%	7.5%
Consumer Cyclical	8.7%	10.9%
Communication Services	8.5%	16.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	4.1%
Real Estate	2.7%	1.5%
Utilities	2.2%	1.9%
Basic Materials	2.1%	1.5%
Energy	0.5%	2.6%

Return for Risk

CVLC vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

CVLC

CVLC Risk / Return Rank: 74
CVLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
CVLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
CVLC Omega Ratio Rank: 73
CVLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
CVLC Martin Ratio Rank: 78

BDGS

BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 78
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 82
BDGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
BDGS Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

CVLC vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calvert US Large-Cap Core Responsible Index ETF (CVLC) 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.

	CVLC	BDGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.52	2.39	+0.13
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.46	3.54	-0.08
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.50	-0.05
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.30	3.67	-0.37
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	15.18	17.59	-2.41
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CVLC vs. BDGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CVLC Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is comparable to the BDGS Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CVLC and BDGS, 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

	CVLC	BDGS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.52	2.39	+0.13
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.39	1.77	-0.38

Drawdowns

CVLC vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CVLC drawdown since its inception was -19.92%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CVLC and BDGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	CVLC	BDGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.92%	-9.12%	-10.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.61%	-4.03%	-5.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.92%	-9.12%	-10.80%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.54%	+0.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.41%	-0.64%	-1.77%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.09%	0.84%	+1.25%

Volatility

CVLC vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison

Calvert US Large-Cap Core Responsible Index ETF (CVLC) has a higher volatility of 3.30% compared to Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) at 1.09%. This indicates that CVLC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BDGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CVLC	BDGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.30%	1.09%	+2.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.65%	4.73%	+4.92%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.49%	6.08%	+6.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.55%	8.21%	+7.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.55%	8.21%	+7.34%

CVLC vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

CVLC has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

CVLC vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison

CVLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.89%, more than BDGS's 0.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	0.52%	0.55%	1.81%	0.84%
CVLC Calvert US Large-Cap Core Responsible Index ETF	0.89%	1.02%	1.03%	0.91%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CVLC and BDGS in my portfolio?

CVLC and BDGS have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CVLC or BDGS?

CVLC has higher volatility (3.30%) compared to BDGS (1.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CVLC dropped -19.92% vs BDGS's -9.12%.

Which ETF is better, CVLC or BDGS?

On 3-year performance, CVLC leads with 22.60% vs 14.17% for BDGS. On fees, CVLC is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, BDGS has been the lower-risk option at 1.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CVLC or BDGS?

Over the 3-year period, CVLC has performed better with a 22.60% return vs 14.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CVLC or BDGS?

CVLC is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for BDGS.

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

CVLC has the higher dividend yield at 0.89%, compared with 0.52% for BDGS.

What is the main difference between CVLC and BDGS?

They also come from different issuers: Calvert and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for CVLC and 0.85% for BDGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CVLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 2.39), 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.