GSPY vs. BDGS

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

GSPY (Gotham Enhanced 500 ETF) and BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GSPY is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Gotham, while BDGS is a Tactical Allocation fund actively managed by Bridges. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, GSPY returned 19.59%/yr vs 13.19%/yr for BDGS. Their 0.78 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. GSPY charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for BDGS.

Performance

GSPY vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Gotham Enhanced 500 ETF (GSPY) 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, GSPY achieves a 11.59% return, which is significantly higher than BDGS's 4.35% return.

GSPY

• 1D: 0.87%
• 1M: 1.25%
• 6M: 9.70%
• YTD: 11.59%
• 1Y: 24.15%
• 3Y*: 19.59%
• 5Y*: 13.03%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 14.97%

BDGS

• 1D: 0.56%
• 1M: -0.71%
• 6M: 4.08%
• YTD: 4.35%
• 1Y: 10.14%
• 3Y*: 13.19%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.11%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	$35.83K	$93.96K	$183.58K
GSPY Gotham Enhanced 500 ETF	$111.53K	$112.18K	$139.32K

GSPY vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GSPY Gotham Enhanced 500 ETF	11.59%	18.28%	23.58%	16.69%
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	4.35%	10.61%	19.07%	8.23%

Correlation

The correlation between GSPY and BDGS is 0.79, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.79
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2023	0.78

The correlation between GSPY and BDGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

GSPY vs. BDGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GSPY	BDGS
Technology	38.8%	38.9%
Financial Services	12.0%	9.3%
Communication Services	10.6%	15.1%
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	12.2%
Healthcare	8.9%	7.1%
Industrials	6.8%	6.8%
Consumer Defensive	5.5%	3.6%
Energy	2.7%	2.4%
Real Estate	2.2%	1.5%
Basic Materials	1.2%	1.3%
Utilities	0.7%	1.8%

Return for Risk

GSPY vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

GSPY

GSPY Risk / Return Rank: 75
GSPY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
GSPY Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
GSPY Omega Ratio Rank: 73
GSPY Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
GSPY Martin Ratio Rank: 82

BDGS

BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 64
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 66
BDGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
BDGS Martin Ratio Rank: 71

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

GSPY vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Gotham Enhanced 500 ETF (GSPY) 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.

	GSPY	BDGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.69	1.38	+0.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.27	2.12	+0.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.28	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.57	2.04	+0.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.91	8.70	+2.22

GSPY vs. BDGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GSPY Sharpe Ratio is 1.69, which is comparable to the BDGS Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GSPY 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.

Drawdowns

GSPY vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GSPY drawdown since its inception was -23.30%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GSPY and BDGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	GSPY	BDGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.30%	-9.12%	-14.18%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.62%	-4.76%	-3.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.67%	-9.12%	-9.55%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.30%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.30%	-2.03%	+1.73%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.66%	-0.69%	-3.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.03%	1.12%	+0.91%

Volatility

GSPY vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison

Gotham Enhanced 500 ETF (GSPY) has a higher volatility of 3.50% compared to Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) at 3.21%. This indicates that GSPY'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

	GSPY	BDGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.50%	3.21%	+0.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.77%	6.11%	+3.66%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.15%	7.06%	+6.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.65%	8.30%	+8.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.26%	8.30%	+7.96%

GSPY vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

GSPY has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.87% expense ratio.

Dividends

GSPY vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison

GSPY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.34%, 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%
GSPY Gotham Enhanced 500 ETF	2.34%	2.61%	0.84%	1.06%	1.25%	0.23%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GSPY and BDGS in my portfolio?

GSPY and BDGS have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GSPY or BDGS?

GSPY has higher volatility (3.50%) compared to BDGS (3.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GSPY dropped -23.30% vs BDGS's -9.12%.

Which ETF is better, GSPY or BDGS?

On 3-year performance, GSPY leads with 19.59% vs 13.19% for BDGS. On fees, GSPY is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, BDGS has been the lower-risk option at 3.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GSPY or BDGS?

Over the 3-year period, GSPY has performed better with a 19.59% return vs 13.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GSPY or BDGS?

GSPY is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for BDGS.

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

GSPY has the higher dividend yield at 2.34%, compared with 0.53% for BDGS.

What is the main difference between GSPY and BDGS?

GSPY is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BDGS is Tactical Allocation. They also come from different issuers: Gotham and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for GSPY and 0.87% for BDGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GSPY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.69 vs 1.38), 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.