LOHA vs. BDGS
LOHA (Roundhill HALO ETF) and BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. LOHA is passively managed, while BDGS is actively managed. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LOHA charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for BDGS.
Performance
LOHA vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
LOHA
- 1D
- 1.17%
- 1M
- 2.13%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BDGS
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- -0.67%
- YTD
- 4.68%
- 6M
- 4.96%
- 1Y
- 12.75%
- 3Y*
- 13.68%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LOHA vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
LOHA Roundhill HALO ETF | 2.13% |
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF | -0.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between LOHA and BDGS is 0.32, 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 May 14, 2026 | 0.32 |
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
LOHA vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank
LOHA
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
BDGS
LOHA vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill HALO ETF (LOHA) 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.
| LOHA | BDGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.41 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 3.09 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 14.01 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LOHA vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LOHA drawdown since its inception was -2.23%, smaller than the maximum BDGS drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LOHA and BDGS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LOHA | BDGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.23% | -9.12% | +6.89% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -4.03% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -9.12% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -1.72% | +1.72% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.76% | -0.65% | -0.11% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.89% | — |
Volatility
LOHA vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LOHA | BDGS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 1.40% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 4.85% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.79% | 6.13% | +7.66% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.79% | 8.19% | +5.60% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.79% | 8.19% | +5.60% |
LOHA vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison
LOHA has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.87% expense ratio.
Dividends
LOHA vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison
LOHA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BDGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF | 0.53% | 0.55% | 1.81% | 0.84% |
LOHA Roundhill HALO ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LOHA and BDGS have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, LOHA is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
LOHA is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for BDGS.
BDGS has the higher dividend yield at 0.53%, compared with 0.00% for LOHA.
They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for LOHA and 0.87% for BDGS.
Find the right allocation for LOHA 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