PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LVDS vs. BDVG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LVDS vs. BDVG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF (LVDS) and iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF (BDVG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LVDS achieves a 13.56% return, which is significantly higher than BDVG's 12.71% return.


LVDS

1D
0.18%
1M
3.85%
YTD
13.56%
6M
14.52%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BDVG

1D
-0.40%
1M
6.92%
YTD
12.71%
6M
12.51%
1Y
23.93%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LVDS vs. BDVG - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between LVDS and BDVG is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 15, 2025

0.81

LVDS vs. BDVG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
LVDS
BDVG

Financial Services

18.3%
17.0%

Technology

15.9%
18.2%

Industrials

10.2%
18.6%

Healthcare

8.6%
9.8%

Consumer Cyclical

8.0%
6.2%

Communication Services

7.5%
0.6%

Energy

6.6%
10.5%

Consumer Defensive

6.5%
11.6%

Utilities

4.8%
3.1%

Real Estate

4.2%
1.3%

Basic Materials

1.7%
3.7%

Financial Services

LVDS
18.3%
BDVG
17.0%

Technology

LVDS
15.9%
BDVG
18.2%

Industrials

LVDS
10.2%
BDVG
18.6%

Healthcare

LVDS
8.6%
BDVG
9.8%

Consumer Cyclical

LVDS
8.0%
BDVG
6.2%

Communication Services

LVDS
7.5%
BDVG
0.6%

Energy

LVDS
6.6%
BDVG
10.5%

Consumer Defensive

LVDS
6.5%
BDVG
11.6%

Utilities

LVDS
4.8%
BDVG
3.1%

Real Estate

LVDS
4.2%
BDVG
1.3%

Basic Materials

LVDS
1.7%
BDVG
3.7%

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

LVDS vs. BDVG — Risk / Return Rank

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

LVDS

BDVG
BDVG Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
BDVG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BDVG Sortino Ratio Rank: 7878
Sortino Ratio Rank
BDVG Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
BDVG Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
BDVG Martin Ratio Rank: 7474
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.

LVDS vs. BDVG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF (LVDS) and iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF (BDVG). 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.


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

LVDS vs. BDVG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


LVDSBDVGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.42

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

2.39

1.21

+1.18

Drawdowns

LVDS vs. BDVG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LVDS drawdown since its inception was -6.64%, smaller than the maximum BDVG drawdown of -14.46%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LVDS and BDVG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LVDSBDVGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-6.64%

-14.46%

+7.82%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.70%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.40%

+0.40%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.98%

-2.35%

+1.37%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.74%

Volatility

LVDS vs. BDVG - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LVDSBDVGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.19%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.52%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.43%

9.96%

+0.47%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.43%

11.95%

-1.52%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.43%

11.95%

-1.52%

LVDS vs. BDVG - Expense Ratio Comparison

LVDS has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is lower than BDVG's 0.55% expense ratio.


Dividends

LVDS vs. BDVG - Dividend Comparison

LVDS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.56%, more than BDVG's 1.52% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
BDVG
iMGP Berkshire Dividend Growth ETF
1.52%1.75%1.69%0.95%
LVDS
JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Large Value ETF
7.56%8.25%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


LVDS and BDVG have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, LVDS is cheaper at 0.30% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

LVDS is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for BDVG.

LVDS has the higher dividend yield at 7.56%, compared with 1.52% for BDVG.

They also come from different issuers: JPMorgan and iMGP. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for LVDS and 0.55% for BDVG.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for LVDS and BDVG

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