PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
KAT vs. BDGS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

KAT vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Scharf ETF (KAT) and Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KAT achieves a 1.77% return, which is significantly lower than BDGS's 5.98% return.


KAT

1D
0.53%
1M
1.96%
6M
-0.75%
YTD
1.77%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BDGS

1D
0.19%
1M
1.24%
6M
5.60%
YTD
5.98%
1Y
11.91%
3Y*
14.00%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

KAT vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
KAT
Scharf ETF
1.77%0.85%
BDGS
Bridges Capital Tactical ETF
5.98%3.21%

Correlation

The correlation between KAT and BDGS is 0.45, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 25, 2025

0.45

KAT vs. BDGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
KAT
BDGS

Financial Services

25.1%
9.3%

Healthcare

22.3%
7.5%

Industrials

14.6%
6.6%

Technology

14.3%
37.4%

Energy

6.6%
2.6%

Communication Services

6.6%
16.6%

Consumer Cyclical

5.0%
10.9%

Basic Materials

3.3%
1.5%

Consumer Defensive

2.3%
4.1%

Real Estate

-

1.5%

Utilities

-

1.9%

Financial Services

KAT
25.1%
BDGS
9.3%

Healthcare

KAT
22.3%
BDGS
7.5%

Industrials

KAT
14.6%
BDGS
6.6%

Technology

KAT
14.3%
BDGS
37.4%

Energy

KAT
6.6%
BDGS
2.6%

Communication Services

KAT
6.6%
BDGS
16.6%

Consumer Cyclical

KAT
5.0%
BDGS
10.9%

Basic Materials

KAT
3.3%
BDGS
1.5%

Consumer Defensive

KAT
2.3%
BDGS
4.1%

Real Estate

KAT

-

BDGS
1.5%

Utilities

KAT

-

BDGS
1.9%

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

KAT vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

KAT

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


BDGS
BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
BDGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
BDGS Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
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.

KAT vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Scharf ETF (KAT) 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.


KATBDGSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.98

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.18

KAT vs. BDGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

KAT vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KAT drawdown since its inception was -9.25%, roughly equal to the maximum BDGS drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KAT and BDGS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


KATBDGSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-9.25%

-9.12%

-0.13%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.03%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.12%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.65%

-0.50%

-3.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.46%

-0.67%

-2.79%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.99%

Volatility

KAT vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


KATBDGSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.38%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.28%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.63%

6.35%

+4.28%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.63%

8.19%

+2.44%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.63%

8.19%

+2.44%

KAT vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

KAT has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.87% expense ratio.


Dividends

KAT vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison

KAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.08%, less than BDGS's 0.52% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
BDGS
Bridges Capital Tactical ETF
0.52%0.55%1.81%0.84%
KAT
Scharf ETF
0.08%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


KAT and BDGS have a correlation of 0.45, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, KAT is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

KAT is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for BDGS.

BDGS has the higher dividend yield at 0.52%, compared with 0.08% for KAT.

They also come from different issuers: Scharf Investments and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for KAT and 0.87% for BDGS.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for KAT and BDGS

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