GUSA vs. BDGS

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Goldman Sachs MarketBeta U.S. 1000 Equity ETF (GUSA) and Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS).

GUSA and BDGS are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. GUSA is a passively managed fund by Goldman Sachs that tracks the performance of the Solactive GBS United States 1000 Index - Benchmark TR Gross. It was launched on Apr 5, 2022. BDGS is an actively managed fund by Bridges. It was launched on May 10, 2023.

Performance

GUSA vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs MarketBeta U.S. 1000 Equity ETF (GUSA) and Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

GUSA vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GUSA Goldman Sachs MarketBeta U.S. 1000 Equity ETF	-3.63%	17.51%	24.46%	17.16%
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	-0.87%	10.61%	19.07%	8.31%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GUSA achieves a -3.63% return, which is significantly lower than BDGS's -0.87% return.

GUSA

• 1D: 0.80%
• 1M: -4.56%
• YTD: -3.63%
• 6M: -1.66%
• 1Y: 18.26%
• 3Y*: 18.37%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BDGS

• 1D: 0.54%
• 1M: -0.85%
• YTD: -0.87%
• 6M: 0.57%
• 1Y: 10.90%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GUSA vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

GUSA has a 0.11% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.85% expense ratio.

BDGS

Bridges Capital Tactical ETF

GUSA

Goldman Sachs MarketBeta U.S. 1000 Equity ETF

Return for Risk

GUSA vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

GUSA

GUSA Risk / Return Rank: 56
GUSA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
GUSA Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
GUSA Omega Ratio Rank: 58
GUSA Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
GUSA Martin Ratio Rank: 64

BDGS

BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 70
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 75
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.

GUSA vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs MarketBeta U.S. 1000 Equity ETF (GUSA) 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.

	GUSA	BDGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.01	1.02	-0.01
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.52	1.72	-0.20
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.29	-0.06
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.47	1.90	-0.44
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.11	9.84	-2.73
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GUSA vs. BDGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GUSA Sharpe Ratio is 1.01, which is comparable to the BDGS Sharpe Ratio of 1.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GUSA and BDGS, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GUSA	BDGS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.01	1.02	-0.01
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.68	1.54	-0.86

Correlation

The correlation between GUSA and BDGS is 0.79, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

GUSA vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison

GUSA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.11%, more than BDGS's 0.56% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
GUSA Goldman Sachs MarketBeta U.S. 1000 Equity ETF	1.11%	0.99%	1.16%	1.36%	1.00%
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	0.56%	0.55%	1.81%	0.84%	0.00%

Drawdowns

GUSA vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GUSA drawdown since its inception was -19.61%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GUSA and BDGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	GUSA	BDGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.61%	-9.12%	-10.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.79%	-5.85%	-6.94%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.64%	-1.61%	-4.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.54%	-0.67%	-3.87%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.63%	1.13%	+1.50%

Volatility

GUSA vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs MarketBeta U.S. 1000 Equity ETF (GUSA) has a higher volatility of 5.44% compared to Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) at 3.45%. This indicates that GUSA'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

	GUSA	BDGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.44%	3.45%	+1.99%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.85%	5.12%	+4.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.14%	10.72%	+7.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.46%	8.35%	+9.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.46%	8.35%	+9.11%