JQUA vs. BDGS

Last updated Jun 21, 2026

JQUA (JPMorgan U.S. Quality Factor ETF) and BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. JQUA is passively managed, while BDGS is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, JQUA returned 19.07%/yr vs 13.85%/yr for BDGS. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. JQUA charges 0.12%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for BDGS.

Performance

JQUA vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in JPMorgan U.S. Quality Factor ETF (JQUA) 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, JQUA achieves a 13.36% return, which is significantly higher than BDGS's 5.33% return.

JQUA

• 1D: 1.25%
• 1M: 3.49%
• YTD: 13.36%
• 6M: 12.98%
• 1Y: 23.55%
• 3Y*: 19.07%
• 5Y*: 14.00%
• 10Y*: —

BDGS

• 1D: 0.71%
• 1M: 0.07%
• YTD: 5.33%
• 6M: 5.49%
• 1Y: 13.68%
• 3Y*: 13.85%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

JQUA vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
JQUA JPMorgan U.S. Quality Factor ETF	13.36%	11.69%	21.21%	16.64%
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	5.33%	10.61%	19.07%	8.23%

Correlation

The correlation between JQUA and BDGS is 0.67, 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	0.67
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2023	0.70

The correlation between JQUA and BDGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

JQUA vs. BDGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	JQUA	BDGS
Technology	43.9%	37.4%
Financial Services	11.1%	9.3%
Consumer Cyclical	9.2%	10.9%
Industrials	8.0%	6.6%
Healthcare	7.9%	7.5%
Communication Services	6.5%	16.6%
Consumer Defensive	5.2%	4.1%
Energy	3.4%	2.6%
Real Estate	2.1%	1.5%
Basic Materials	1.6%	1.5%
Utilities	1.2%	1.9%

Return for Risk

JQUA vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

JQUA

JQUA Risk / Return Rank: 65
JQUA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
JQUA Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
JQUA Omega Ratio Rank: 58
JQUA Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
JQUA Martin Ratio Rank: 75

BDGS

BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 74
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 78
BDGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
BDGS Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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.

JQUA vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for JPMorgan U.S. Quality Factor ETF (JQUA) 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.

	JQUA	BDGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.97	2.11	-0.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.77	3.16	-0.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.43	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.28	3.31	-0.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.45	14.81	-1.36

JQUA vs. BDGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JQUA Sharpe Ratio is 1.97, which is comparable to the BDGS Sharpe Ratio of 2.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JQUA 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

JQUA vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JQUA drawdown since its inception was -32.92%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JQUA and BDGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	JQUA	BDGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.92%	-9.12%	-23.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.13%	-4.03%	-3.10%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.81%	-9.12%	-7.69%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.47%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.97%	-1.11%	+0.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.15%	-0.66%	-3.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.74%	0.90%	+0.84%

Volatility

JQUA vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison

JPMorgan U.S. Quality Factor ETF (JQUA) has a higher volatility of 5.14% compared to Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) at 2.18%. This indicates that JQUA'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

	JQUA	BDGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.14%	2.18%	+2.96%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.31%	5.11%	+4.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.88%	6.33%	+5.55%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.72%	8.22%	+7.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.01%	8.22%	+9.79%

JQUA vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

JQUA has a 0.12% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.87% expense ratio.

Dividends

JQUA vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison

JQUA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.08%, more than BDGS's 0.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	0.52%	0.55%	1.81%	0.84%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
JQUA JPMorgan U.S. Quality Factor ETF	1.08%	1.19%	1.24%	1.21%	1.60%	1.32%	1.44%	1.67%	2.10%	0.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JQUA and BDGS in my portfolio?

JQUA and BDGS have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, JQUA or BDGS?

JQUA has higher volatility (5.14%) compared to BDGS (2.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JQUA dropped -32.92% vs BDGS's -9.12%.

Which ETF is better, JQUA or BDGS?

On 3-year performance, JQUA leads with 19.07% vs 13.85% for BDGS. On fees, JQUA is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, BDGS has been the lower-risk option at 2.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JQUA or BDGS?

Over the 3-year period, JQUA has performed better with a 19.07% return vs 13.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JQUA or BDGS?

JQUA is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for BDGS.

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

JQUA has the higher dividend yield at 1.08%, compared with 0.52% for BDGS.

What is the main difference between JQUA and BDGS?

They also come from different issuers: JPMorgan and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.12% for JQUA and 0.87% for BDGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BDGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 1.97), 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.