DSPY vs. BDGS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

DSPY (Tema S&P 500 Historical Weight ETF Strategy) and BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, DSPY returned 26.81% vs 13.85% for BDGS. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. DSPY charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for BDGS.

Performance

DSPY vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Tema S&P 500 Historical Weight ETF Strategy (DSPY) 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, DSPY achieves a 12.26% return, which is significantly higher than BDGS's 5.64% return.

DSPY

• 1D: -0.36%
• 1M: 5.59%
• YTD: 12.26%
• 6M: 12.63%
• 1Y: 26.81%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BDGS

• 1D: -0.29%
• 1M: 1.26%
• YTD: 5.64%
• 6M: 5.65%
• 1Y: 13.85%
• 3Y*: 14.06%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DSPY vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
DSPY Tema S&P 500 Historical Weight ETF Strategy	12.26%	18.46%
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	5.64%	11.88%

Correlation

The correlation between DSPY and BDGS is 0.74, 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	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2025	0.76

The correlation between DSPY and BDGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

DSPY vs. BDGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DSPY	BDGS
Technology	28.8%	37.4%
Financial Services	14.2%	9.3%
Industrials	10.8%	6.6%
Healthcare	10.6%	7.5%
Consumer Cyclical	9.3%	10.9%
Communication Services	7.7%	16.6%
Consumer Defensive	6.4%	4.1%
Energy	4.4%	2.6%
Utilities	3.0%	1.9%
Real Estate	2.5%	1.5%
Basic Materials	2.3%	1.5%

Return for Risk

DSPY vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

DSPY

DSPY Risk / Return Rank: 75
DSPY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
DSPY Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
DSPY Omega Ratio Rank: 72
DSPY Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
DSPY Martin Ratio Rank: 82

BDGS

BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 74
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 78
BDGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
BDGS Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

DSPY vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Tema S&P 500 Historical Weight ETF Strategy (DSPY) 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.

	DSPY	BDGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.41	2.29	+0.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.34	3.40	-0.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.47	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.57	3.45	+0.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.34	16.47	-0.13
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DSPY vs. BDGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DSPY Sharpe Ratio is 2.41, which is comparable to the BDGS Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DSPY 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

	DSPY	BDGS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.41	2.29	+0.12
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.68	1.76	-0.08

Drawdowns

DSPY vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DSPY drawdown since its inception was -12.15%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DSPY and BDGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	DSPY	BDGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.15%	-9.12%	-3.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.55%	-4.03%	-3.52%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-9.12%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.36%	-0.83%	+0.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.25%	-0.64%	-0.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.64%	0.84%	+0.80%

Volatility

DSPY vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison

Tema S&P 500 Historical Weight ETF Strategy (DSPY) has a higher volatility of 2.82% compared to Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) at 1.14%. This indicates that DSPY'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

	DSPY	BDGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.82%	1.14%	+1.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.52%	4.74%	+3.78%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.21%	6.08%	+5.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.53%	8.21%	+8.32%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.53%	8.21%	+8.32%

DSPY vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

DSPY has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.87% expense ratio.

Dividends

DSPY vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison

DSPY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.74%, 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%
DSPY Tema S&P 500 Historical Weight ETF Strategy	0.74%	0.72%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DSPY and BDGS in my portfolio?

DSPY and BDGS have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DSPY or BDGS?

DSPY has higher volatility (2.82%) compared to BDGS (1.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DSPY dropped -12.15% vs BDGS's -9.12%.

Which ETF is better, DSPY or BDGS?

On 1-year performance, DSPY leads with 26.81% vs 13.85% for BDGS. On fees, DSPY is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, BDGS has been the lower-risk option at 1.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DSPY or BDGS?

Over the 1-year period, DSPY has performed better with a 26.81% return vs 13.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DSPY or BDGS?

DSPY is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for BDGS.

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

DSPY has the higher dividend yield at 0.74%, compared with 0.52% for BDGS.

What is the main difference between DSPY and BDGS?

They also come from different issuers: Tema and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for DSPY and 0.87% for BDGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DSPY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 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.