ESMV vs. BDGS
ESMV (iShares ESG MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF) and BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. ESMV is passively managed, while BDGS is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, ESMV returned 10.53%/yr vs 13.55%/yr for BDGS. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ESMV charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for BDGS.
Performance
ESMV vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ESMV achieves a 4.29% return, which is significantly lower than BDGS's 4.55% return.
ESMV
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- -0.39%
- YTD
- 4.29%
- 6M
- 3.63%
- 1Y
- 7.58%
- 3Y*
- 10.53%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BDGS
- 1D
- -0.74%
- 1M
- -0.80%
- YTD
- 4.55%
- 6M
- 4.54%
- 1Y
- 12.84%
- 3Y*
- 13.55%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ESMV vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
ESMV iShares ESG MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF | 4.29% | 5.34% | 13.06% | 8.79% |
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF | 4.55% | 10.61% | 19.07% | 8.23% |
Correlation
The correlation between ESMV and BDGS is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2023 | 0.51 |
The correlation between ESMV and BDGS shifts across timeframes, from 0.39 (1 year) to 0.51 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
ESMV vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank
ESMV
BDGS
ESMV vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares ESG MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF (ESMV) 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.
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.
| ESMV | BDGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.28 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.93 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.14 | 1.41 | -0.27 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.09 | 3.20 | -2.11 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.32 | 14.21 | -10.89 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ESMV vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ESMV drawdown since its inception was -19.77%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESMV and BDGS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ESMV | BDGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.77% | -9.12% | -10.65% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.01% | -4.03% | -2.98% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.16% | -9.12% | -3.04% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.71% | -1.84% | +0.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.28% | -0.66% | -4.62% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.29% | 0.91% | +1.38% |
Volatility
ESMV vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison
iShares ESG MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF (ESMV) has a higher volatility of 2.82% compared to Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) at 2.28%. This indicates that ESMV'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
| ESMV | BDGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.82% | 2.28% | +0.54% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.53% | 5.16% | +1.37% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.17% | 6.38% | +3.79% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.21% | 8.23% | +4.98% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.21% | 8.23% | +4.98% |
ESMV vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison
ESMV has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.87% expense ratio.
Dividends
ESMV vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison
ESMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.54%, more than BDGS's 0.53% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF | 0.53% | 0.55% | 1.81% | 0.84% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ESMV iShares ESG MSCI USA Min Vol Factor ETF | 1.54% | 1.56% | 1.71% | 1.75% | 1.66% | 0.24% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ESMV and BDGS have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ESMV has higher volatility (2.82%) compared to BDGS (2.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ESMV dropped -19.77% vs BDGS's -9.12%.
On 3-year performance, BDGS leads with 13.55% vs 10.53% for ESMV. On fees, ESMV is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, BDGS has been the lower-risk option at 2.28%. 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 13.55% return vs 10.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ESMV is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for BDGS.
ESMV has the higher dividend yield at 1.54%, compared with 0.53% for BDGS.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for ESMV and 0.87% for BDGS.
BDGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 0.75), 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 ESMV 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