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

Performance

LFEQ vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Long/Flat Trend ETF (LFEQ) 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, LFEQ achieves a 10.63% return, which is significantly higher than BDGS's 5.64% return.


LFEQ

1D
-0.61%
1M
5.08%
YTD
10.63%
6M
10.69%
1Y
27.35%
3Y*
18.29%
5Y*
9.91%
10Y*

BDGS

1D
-0.29%
1M
1.26%
YTD
5.64%
6M
5.65%
1Y
13.85%
3Y*
14.06%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LFEQ vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
LFEQ
VanEck Long/Flat Trend ETF
10.63%10.49%24.30%13.06%
BDGS
Bridges Capital Tactical ETF
5.64%10.61%19.07%8.31%

Correlation

The correlation between LFEQ and BDGS is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.83

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.77

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2023

0.77

The correlation between LFEQ and BDGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

LFEQ vs. BDGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
LFEQ
BDGS

Technology

33.6%
37.4%

Financial Services

12.2%
9.3%

Communication Services

10.5%
16.6%

Consumer Cyclical

10.0%
10.9%

Healthcare

9.5%
7.5%

Industrials

8.5%
6.6%

Consumer Defensive

5.3%
4.1%

Energy

4.0%
2.6%

Utilities

2.6%
1.9%

Real Estate

2.0%
1.5%

Basic Materials

1.9%
1.5%

Technology

LFEQ
33.6%
BDGS
37.4%

Financial Services

LFEQ
12.2%
BDGS
9.3%

Communication Services

LFEQ
10.5%
BDGS
16.6%

Consumer Cyclical

LFEQ
10.0%
BDGS
10.9%

Healthcare

LFEQ
9.5%
BDGS
7.5%

Industrials

LFEQ
8.5%
BDGS
6.6%

Consumer Defensive

LFEQ
5.3%
BDGS
4.1%

Energy

LFEQ
4.0%
BDGS
2.6%

Utilities

LFEQ
2.6%
BDGS
1.9%

Real Estate

LFEQ
2.0%
BDGS
1.5%

Basic Materials

LFEQ
1.9%
BDGS
1.5%

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

LFEQ vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

LFEQ
LFEQ Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
LFEQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LFEQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
LFEQ Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
LFEQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6262
Calmar Ratio Rank
LFEQ Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank

BDGS
BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
BDGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
BDGS Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
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.

LFEQ vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Long/Flat Trend ETF (LFEQ) 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.


LFEQBDGSDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.30

2.29

+0.01

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.16

3.40

-0.24

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.47

-0.06

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.06

3.45

-0.39

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

14.08

16.47

-2.39

LFEQ vs. BDGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LFEQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.30, which is comparable to the BDGS Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LFEQ 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


LFEQBDGSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.30

2.29

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.69

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.67

1.76

-1.08

Drawdowns

LFEQ vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LFEQ drawdown since its inception was -35.19%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LFEQ and BDGS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LFEQBDGSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-35.19%

-9.12%

-26.07%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.98%

-4.03%

-4.95%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.97%

-9.12%

-9.85%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.55%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.61%

-0.83%

+0.22%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.16%

-0.64%

-5.52%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.95%

0.84%

+1.11%

Volatility

LFEQ vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Long/Flat Trend ETF (LFEQ) has a higher volatility of 2.90% compared to Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) at 1.14%. This indicates that LFEQ'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LFEQBDGSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.90%

1.14%

+1.76%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.09%

4.74%

+4.35%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.98%

6.08%

+5.90%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.36%

8.21%

+6.15%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.58%

8.21%

+9.37%

LFEQ vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

LFEQ has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.85% expense ratio.


Dividends

LFEQ vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison

LFEQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.82%, more than BDGS's 0.52% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
LFEQ
VanEck Long/Flat Trend ETF
0.82%0.90%0.74%1.56%1.19%0.37%2.06%1.45%1.07%0.79%

Frequently Asked Questions


LFEQ and BDGS have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LFEQ has higher volatility (2.90%) compared to BDGS (1.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LFEQ dropped -35.19% vs BDGS's -9.12%.

On 3-year performance, LFEQ leads with 18.29% vs 14.06% for BDGS. On fees, LFEQ is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, BDGS has been the lower-risk option at 1.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, LFEQ has performed better with a 18.29% return vs 14.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LFEQ is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for BDGS.

LFEQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.82%, compared with 0.52% for BDGS.

LFEQ is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while BDGS is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for LFEQ and 0.85% for BDGS.

LFEQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 2.29), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LFEQ 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