FLCC vs. BDGS

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

FLCC (Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Core ETF) and BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FLCC returned 23.60% vs 14.42% for BDGS. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FLCC charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for BDGS.

Performance

FLCC vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Core ETF (FLCC) 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, FLCC achieves a 9.74% return, which is significantly higher than BDGS's 5.94% return.

FLCC

• 1D: -0.12%
• 1M: 3.96%
• YTD: 9.74%
• 6M: 10.95%
• 1Y: 23.60%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BDGS

• 1D: -0.30%
• 1M: 1.49%
• YTD: 5.94%
• 6M: 5.90%
• 1Y: 14.42%
• 3Y*: 14.17%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FLCC vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FLCC Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Core ETF	9.74%	16.61%	9.94%
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	5.94%	10.61%	7.31%

Correlation

The correlation between FLCC and BDGS is 0.76, 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	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 1, 2024	0.79

The correlation between FLCC and BDGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

FLCC vs. BDGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FLCC	BDGS
Technology	35.7%	37.4%
Consumer Cyclical	12.3%	10.9%
Financial Services	10.8%	9.3%
Communication Services	10.2%	16.6%
Healthcare	9.5%	7.5%
Industrials	9.1%	6.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.2%	4.1%
Energy	3.1%	2.6%
Basic Materials	2.3%	1.5%
Utilities	1.4%	1.9%
Real Estate	1.2%	1.5%

Return for Risk

FLCC vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLCC

FLCC Risk / Return Rank: 54
FLCC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
FLCC Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
FLCC Omega Ratio Rank: 53
FLCC Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
FLCC Martin Ratio Rank: 58

BDGS

BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 78
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 82
BDGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
BDGS Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

FLCC vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Core ETF (FLCC) 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.

	FLCC	BDGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.87	2.39	-0.51
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.61	3.54	-0.93
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.50	-0.16
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.59	3.67	-1.08
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	10.52	17.59	-7.07
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FLCC vs. BDGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLCC Sharpe Ratio is 1.87, which is comparable to the BDGS Sharpe Ratio of 2.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLCC 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

	FLCC	BDGS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.87	2.39	-0.51
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.18	1.77	-0.59

Drawdowns

FLCC vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLCC drawdown since its inception was -19.18%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLCC and BDGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	FLCC	BDGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.18%	-9.12%	-10.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.31%	-4.03%	-5.28%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-9.12%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.12%	-0.54%	+0.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.35%	-0.64%	-1.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.29%	0.84%	+1.45%

Volatility

FLCC vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison

Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Core ETF (FLCC) has a higher volatility of 2.54% compared to Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) at 1.09%. This indicates that FLCC'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

	FLCC	BDGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.54%	1.09%	+1.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.51%	4.73%	+4.78%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.66%	6.08%	+6.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.38%	8.21%	+9.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.38%	8.21%	+9.17%

FLCC vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLCC has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

FLCC vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison

FLCC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.46%, less than BDGS's 0.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	0.52%	0.55%	1.81%	0.84%
FLCC Federated Hermes MDT Large Cap Core ETF	0.46%	0.50%	0.20%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FLCC and BDGS in my portfolio?

FLCC and BDGS have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FLCC or BDGS?

FLCC has higher volatility (2.54%) compared to BDGS (1.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLCC dropped -19.18% vs BDGS's -9.12%.

Which ETF is better, FLCC or BDGS?

On 1-year performance, FLCC leads with 23.60% vs 14.42% for BDGS. On fees, FLCC is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, BDGS has been the lower-risk option at 1.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FLCC or BDGS?

Over the 1-year period, FLCC has performed better with a 23.60% return vs 14.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FLCC or BDGS?

FLCC is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for BDGS.

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

BDGS has the higher dividend yield at 0.52%, compared with 0.46% for FLCC.

What is the main difference between FLCC and BDGS?

They also come from different issuers: Federated Hermes and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for FLCC and 0.85% for BDGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BDGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs 1.87), 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.