INVG vs. BPH

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

INVG (GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF) and BPH (BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - INVG is a Corporate Bonds fund actively managed by GMO, while BPH is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Precidian. Both are actively managed. Their -0.55 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. INVG charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for BPH.

Performance

INVG vs. BPH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF (INVG) and BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF (BPH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

INVG

• 1D: 0.53%
• 1M: -0.81%
• 6M: -0.07%
• YTD: 0.30%
• 1Y: 2.61%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.56%

BPH

• 1D: -4.23%
• 1M: 12.03%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

*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)
BPH BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF	$45.76K	$51.75K	$50.82K
INVG GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF	$27.15K	$47.67K	$107.50K

INVG vs. BPH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
INVG GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF	0.21%
BPH BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF	-0.39%

Correlation

The correlation between INVG and BPH is -0.55, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 26, 2026	-0.55

Return for Risk

INVG vs. BPH — Risk / Return Rank

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

INVG

INVG Risk / Return Rank: 23
INVG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
INVG Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
INVG Omega Ratio Rank: 21
INVG Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
INVG Martin Ratio Rank: 26

BPH

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

INVG vs. BPH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF (INVG) and BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF (BPH). 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.

	INVG	BPH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.59	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.87	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.83	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.45	—	—

Drawdowns

INVG vs. BPH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum INVG drawdown since its inception was -3.15%, smaller than the maximum BPH drawdown of -15.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for INVG and BPH.

Drawdown Indicators

	INVG	BPH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.15%	-15.58%	+12.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.15%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.26%	-5.73%	+4.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.75%	-5.56%	+4.81%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.07%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	INVG	BPH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.37%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.56%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.41%	29.90%	-25.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.45%	29.90%	-25.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.45%	29.90%	-25.45%

INVG vs. BPH - Expense Ratio Comparison

INVG has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than BPH's 0.19% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

INVG vs. BPH - Dividend Comparison

INVG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.87%, more than BPH's 0.50% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
BPH BP p.l.c. ADRhedged ETF	0.50%	0.00%
INVG GMO Systematic Investment Grade Credit ETF	4.87%	2.81%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both INVG and BPH in my portfolio?

INVG and BPH have a correlation of -0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, INVG or BPH?

On fees, BPH is cheaper at 0.19% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, INVG or BPH?

BPH is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for INVG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, INVG or BPH?

INVG has the higher dividend yield at 4.87%, compared with 0.50% for BPH.

What is the main difference between INVG and BPH?

INVG is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while BPH is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: GMO and Precidian. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for INVG and 0.19% for BPH.