PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
DURA vs. BDGS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

DURA vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors Morningstar Durable Dividend ETF (DURA) and Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

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

DURA vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
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

22.1%
4.1%

Energy

15.0%
2.6%

Healthcare

14.2%
7.5%

Financial Services

9.2%
9.3%

Technology

9.0%
37.4%

Communication Services

8.9%
16.6%

Utilities

6.9%
1.9%

Consumer Cyclical

6.7%
10.9%

Industrials

5.9%
6.6%

Basic Materials

2.0%
1.5%

Real Estate

-

1.5%

Consumer Defensive

DURA
22.1%
BDGS
4.1%

Energy

DURA
15.0%
BDGS
2.6%

Healthcare

DURA
14.2%
BDGS
7.5%

Financial Services

DURA
9.2%
BDGS
9.3%

Technology

DURA
9.0%
BDGS
37.4%

Communication Services

DURA
8.9%
BDGS
16.6%

Utilities

DURA
6.9%
BDGS
1.9%

Consumer Cyclical

DURA
6.7%
BDGS
10.9%

Industrials

DURA
5.9%
BDGS
6.6%

Basic Materials

DURA
2.0%
BDGS
1.5%

Real Estate

DURA

-

BDGS
1.5%

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

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

DURA
DURA Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
DURA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4141
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DURA Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
DURA Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
DURA Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
DURA Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
Martin Ratio Rank

BDGS
BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
BDGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
BDGS Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

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.


DURABDGSDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.48

2.29

-0.81

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.21

3.40

-1.19

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.47

-0.15

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.56

3.45

-0.89

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

10.84

16.47

-5.63

DURA vs. BDGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DURA Sharpe Ratio is 1.48, which is lower than the BDGS Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DURA 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


DURABDGSDifference

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


DURABDGSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest 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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.78%

-0.83%

-1.95%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.92%

-0.64%

-3.28%

Ulcer Index

Depth 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


DURABDGSDifference

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.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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