PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FUNL vs. BGIG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FUNL vs. BGIG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL (FUNL) and Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF (BGIG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FUNL achieves a 5.66% return, which is significantly lower than BGIG's 9.84% return.


FUNL

1D
0.00%
1M
0.00%
YTD
5.66%
6M
7.22%
1Y
18.97%
3Y*
16.53%
5Y*
9.42%
10Y*

BGIG

1D
-0.23%
1M
1.82%
YTD
9.84%
6M
9.56%
1Y
19.51%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FUNL vs. BGIG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
FUNL
CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL
5.66%14.62%15.55%8.02%
BGIG
Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF
9.84%12.49%16.84%4.55%

Correlation

The correlation between FUNL and BGIG is 0.66, 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

0.66

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2023

0.80

The correlation between FUNL and BGIG shifts across timeframes, from 0.66 (1 year) to 0.80 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FUNL vs. BGIG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FUNL
BGIG

Financial Services

19.3%
14.8%

Healthcare

15.3%
14.6%

Technology

14.6%
24.6%

Industrials

11.5%
10.6%

Energy

7.6%
11.2%

Consumer Defensive

7.0%
6.9%

Consumer Cyclical

6.5%
5.4%

Communication Services

5.8%

-

Utilities

5.0%
7.9%

Real Estate

4.5%
3.5%

Basic Materials

2.2%
0.6%

Financial Services

FUNL
19.3%
BGIG
14.8%

Healthcare

FUNL
15.3%
BGIG
14.6%

Technology

FUNL
14.6%
BGIG
24.6%

Industrials

FUNL
11.5%
BGIG
10.6%

Energy

FUNL
7.6%
BGIG
11.2%

Consumer Defensive

FUNL
7.0%
BGIG
6.9%

Consumer Cyclical

FUNL
6.5%
BGIG
5.4%

Communication Services

FUNL
5.8%
BGIG

-

Utilities

FUNL
5.0%
BGIG
7.9%

Real Estate

FUNL
4.5%
BGIG
3.5%

Basic Materials

FUNL
2.2%
BGIG
0.6%

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

FUNL vs. BGIG — Risk / Return Rank

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

FUNL
FUNL Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
FUNL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FUNL Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
FUNL Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
FUNL Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
FUNL Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank

BGIG
BGIG Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
BGIG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BGIG Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
BGIG Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
BGIG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
BGIG Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
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.

FUNL vs. BGIG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL (FUNL) and Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF (BGIG). 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.


FUNLBGIGDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.19

2.18

+0.01

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.26

3.13

+0.13

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.39

+0.08

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

5.01

3.37

+1.64

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

23.31

12.97

+10.34

FUNL vs. BGIG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FUNL Sharpe Ratio is 2.19, which is comparable to the BGIG Sharpe Ratio of 2.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FUNL and BGIG, 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


FUNLBGIGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.19

2.18

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.63

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.95

1.38

-0.43

Drawdowns

FUNL vs. BGIG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FUNL drawdown since its inception was -19.35%, which is greater than BGIG's maximum drawdown of -13.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FUNL and BGIG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FUNLBGIGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.35%

-13.24%

-6.11%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.83%

-5.81%

+1.98%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.37%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.12%

-0.28%

+0.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.54%

-1.70%

-1.84%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.82%

1.51%

-0.69%

Volatility

FUNL vs. BGIG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL (FUNL) is 0.00%, while Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF (BGIG) has a volatility of 2.57%. This indicates that FUNL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BGIG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FUNLBGIGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.00%

2.57%

-2.57%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.24%

6.72%

-1.48%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.82%

9.00%

-0.18%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.16%

11.94%

+3.22%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.29%

11.94%

+3.35%

FUNL vs. BGIG - Expense Ratio Comparison

FUNL has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than BGIG's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

FUNL vs. BGIG - Dividend Comparison

FUNL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.25%, more than BGIG's 1.75% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
BGIG
Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF
1.75%1.89%2.02%0.78%0.00%0.00%0.00%
FUNL
CornerCap Fundametrics Large-Cap ETF FUNL
2.25%2.10%1.78%1.69%1.84%1.55%0.45%

Frequently Asked Questions


FUNL and BGIG have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BGIG has higher volatility (2.57%) compared to FUNL (0.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FUNL dropped -19.35% vs BGIG's -13.24%.

On 1-year performance, BGIG leads with 19.51% vs 18.97% for FUNL. On fees, BGIG is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, FUNL has been the lower-risk option at 0.00%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BGIG has performed better with a 19.51% return vs 18.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BGIG is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for FUNL.

FUNL has the higher dividend yield at 2.25%, compared with 1.75% for BGIG.

They also come from different issuers: CornerCap and Bahl & Gaynor. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FUNL and 0.45% for BGIG.

FUNL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.19 vs 2.18), 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 FUNL and BGIG

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