METD vs. BDGS

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

METD (Direxion Daily META Bear 1X ETF) and BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - METD is a Inverse Equities fund actively managed by Direxion, while BDGS is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Bridges. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, METD returned 13.36% vs 12.84% for BDGS. At a correlation of -0.56, they often move in opposite directions. METD charges 1.00%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for BDGS.

Performance

METD vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Daily META Bear 1X ETF (METD) 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, METD achieves a 11.43% return, which is significantly higher than BDGS's 4.55% return.

METD

• 1D: 2.27%
• 1M: 7.00%
• YTD: 11.43%
• 6M: 11.87%
• 1Y: 13.36%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BDGS

• 1D: -0.74%
• 1M: -0.80%
• YTD: 4.55%
• 6M: 4.54%
• 1Y: 12.84%
• 3Y*: 13.55%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

METD vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
METD Direxion Daily META Bear 1X ETF	11.43%	-17.33%	-15.84%
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	4.55%	10.61%	14.52%

Correlation

The correlation between METD and BDGS is -0.60, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2024	-0.56

The correlation between METD and BDGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.60 to -0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

METD vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

METD

METD Risk / Return Rank: 15
METD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
METD Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
METD Omega Ratio Rank: 16
METD Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
METD Martin Ratio Rank: 14

BDGS

BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 70
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 73
BDGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
BDGS Martin Ratio Rank: 77

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.

METD vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily META Bear 1X ETF (METD) 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.

	METD	BDGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.37	2.03	-1.66
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.75	3.03	-2.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	1.41	-0.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.55	3.20	-2.65
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.25	14.21	-12.95

METD vs. BDGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current METD Sharpe Ratio is 0.37, which is lower than the BDGS Sharpe Ratio of 2.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of METD 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

METD vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum METD drawdown since its inception was -46.03%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for METD and BDGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	METD	BDGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.03%	-9.12%	-36.91%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-24.38%	-4.03%	-20.35%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-9.12%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-28.38%	-1.84%	-26.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-28.60%	-0.66%	-27.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.04%	0.91%	+10.13%

Volatility

METD vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison

Direxion Daily META Bear 1X ETF (METD) has a higher volatility of 13.03% compared to Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) at 2.28%. This indicates that METD'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

	METD	BDGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.03%	2.28%	+10.75%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	28.41%	5.16%	+23.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	36.66%	6.38%	+30.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.67%	8.23%	+28.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.67%	8.23%	+28.44%

METD vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

METD has a 1.00% expense ratio, which is higher than BDGS's 0.87% expense ratio.

Dividends

METD vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison

METD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.45%, more than BDGS's 0.53% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	0.53%	0.55%	1.81%	0.84%
METD Direxion Daily META Bear 1X ETF	2.45%	3.35%	2.30%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both METD and BDGS in my portfolio?

METD and BDGS have a correlation of -0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, METD or BDGS?

METD has higher volatility (13.03%) compared to BDGS (2.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, METD dropped -46.03% vs BDGS's -9.12%.

Which ETF is better, METD or BDGS?

On 1-year performance, METD leads with 13.36% vs 12.84% for BDGS. On fees, BDGS is cheaper at 0.87% per year. On volatility, BDGS has been the lower-risk option at 2.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, METD or BDGS?

Over the 1-year period, METD has performed better with a 13.36% return vs 12.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, METD or BDGS?

BDGS is cheaper with a 0.87% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for METD.

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

METD has the higher dividend yield at 2.45%, compared with 0.53% for BDGS.

What is the main difference between METD and BDGS?

METD is categorized as Inverse Equities, while BDGS is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Direxion and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 1.00% for METD and 0.87% for BDGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BDGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 0.37), 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.