FDRS vs. BDGS
FDRS (Founder-Led ETF) and BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. FDRS is passively managed, while BDGS is actively managed. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FDRS charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for BDGS.
Performance
FDRS vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FDRS achieves a 1.52% return, which is significantly lower than BDGS's 5.56% return.
FDRS
- 1D
- 1.06%
- 1M
- 10.17%
- YTD
- 1.52%
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BDGS
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- 1.33%
- YTD
- 5.56%
- 6M
- 5.60%
- 1Y
- 13.77%
- 3Y*
- 14.02%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FDRS vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FDRS Founder-Led ETF | 1.52% | -1.10% |
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF | 5.56% | -0.21% |
Correlation
The correlation between FDRS and BDGS is 0.78, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 31, 2025 | 0.78 |
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
FDRS vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank
FDRS
BDGS
FDRS vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Founder-Led ETF (FDRS) 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FDRS | BDGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 2.28 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.03 | 1.75 | -1.72 |
Drawdowns
FDRS vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FDRS drawdown since its inception was -21.64%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FDRS and BDGS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FDRS | BDGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.64% | -9.12% | -12.52% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -4.03% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -9.12% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.31% | -0.89% | -2.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.35% | -0.64% | -8.71% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.84% | — |
Volatility
FDRS vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FDRS | BDGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 1.13% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 4.74% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.36% | 6.08% | +22.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.36% | 8.20% | +20.16% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.36% | 8.20% | +20.16% |
FDRS vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison
FDRS has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.87% expense ratio.
Dividends
FDRS vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison
FDRS has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BDGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.52%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF | 0.52% | 0.55% | 1.81% | 0.84% |
FDRS Founder-Led ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FDRS and BDGS have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FDRS is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FDRS is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for BDGS.
BDGS has the higher dividend yield at 0.52%, compared with 0.00% for FDRS.
They also come from different issuers: Corgi Strategies and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for FDRS and 0.87% for BDGS.
Find the right allocation for FDRS 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