DURA vs. BDGS
DURA (VanEck Vectors Morningstar Durable Dividend ETF) and BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. DURA is passively managed, while BDGS is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, DURA returned 10.45%/yr vs 14.06%/yr for BDGS. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. DURA charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for BDGS.
Performance
DURA vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, DURA achieves a 12.22% return, which is significantly higher than BDGS's 5.64% return.
DURA
- 1D
- 0.95%
- 1M
- -0.47%
- YTD
- 12.22%
- 6M
- 12.96%
- 1Y
- 21.75%
- 3Y*
- 10.45%
- 5Y*
- 7.34%
- 10Y*
- —
BDGS
- 1D
- -0.29%
- 1M
- 1.26%
- YTD
- 5.64%
- 6M
- 5.65%
- 1Y
- 13.85%
- 3Y*
- 14.06%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
DURA vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
DURA VanEck Vectors Morningstar Durable Dividend ETF | 12.22% | 7.61% | 8.51% | 3.56% |
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF | 5.64% | 10.61% | 19.07% | 8.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between DURA and BDGS is 0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.06 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2023 | 0.25 |
The correlation between DURA and BDGS shifts across timeframes, from 0.06 (1 year) to 0.25 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
DURA vs. BDGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
DURA
BDGS
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Healthcare
Financial Services
Technology
Communication Services
Utilities
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Basic Materials
Real Estate
-
Consumer Defensive
DURA
BDGS
Energy
DURA
BDGS
Healthcare
DURA
BDGS
Financial Services
DURA
BDGS
Technology
DURA
BDGS
Communication Services
DURA
BDGS
Utilities
DURA
BDGS
Consumer Cyclical
DURA
BDGS
Industrials
DURA
BDGS
Basic Materials
DURA
BDGS
Real Estate
DURA
-
BDGS
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
DURA vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank
DURA
BDGS
DURA vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Morningstar Durable Dividend ETF (DURA) 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.
| DURA | BDGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.48 | 2.29 | -0.81 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.21 | 3.40 | -1.19 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.33 | 1.47 | -0.15 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.56 | 3.45 | -0.89 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.84 | 16.47 | -5.63 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| DURA | BDGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.48 | 2.29 | -0.81 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.54 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.53 | 1.76 | -1.23 |
Drawdowns
DURA vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum DURA drawdown since its inception was -33.15%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DURA and BDGS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| DURA | BDGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.15% | -9.12% | -24.03% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.53% | -4.03% | -4.50% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.27% | -9.12% | -5.15% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -15.80% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.78% | -0.83% | -1.95% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.92% | -0.64% | -3.28% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.01% | 0.84% | +1.17% |
Volatility
DURA vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison
VanEck Vectors Morningstar Durable Dividend ETF (DURA) has a higher volatility of 3.34% compared to Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) at 1.14%. This indicates that DURA'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| DURA | BDGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.34% | 1.14% | +2.20% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.90% | 4.74% | +3.16% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.79% | 6.08% | +8.71% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.63% | 8.21% | +5.42% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.00% | 8.21% | +8.79% |
DURA vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison
DURA has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
DURA vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison
DURA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.31%, more than BDGS's 0.52% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF | 0.52% | 0.55% | 1.81% | 0.84% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
DURA VanEck Vectors Morningstar Durable Dividend ETF | 3.31% | 3.59% | 3.33% | 3.58% | 3.01% | 2.89% | 3.49% | 3.83% | 0.66% |
Frequently Asked Questions
DURA and BDGS have a correlation of 0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
DURA has higher volatility (3.34%) compared to BDGS (1.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DURA dropped -33.15% vs BDGS's -9.12%.
On 3-year performance, BDGS leads with 14.06% vs 10.45% for DURA. On fees, DURA is cheaper at 0.29% 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.
Over the 3-year period, BDGS has performed better with a 14.06% return vs 10.45%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
DURA is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for BDGS.
DURA has the higher dividend yield at 3.31%, compared with 0.52% for BDGS.
They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for DURA and 0.85% for BDGS.
BDGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 1.48), 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 DURA and BDGS
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