OAKM vs. BGIG

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

OAKM (Oakmark U.S. Large Cap ETF) and BGIG (Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, OAKM returned 16.15% vs 20.42% for BGIG. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. OAKM charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for BGIG.

Performance

OAKM vs. BGIG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Oakmark U.S. Large Cap ETF (OAKM) and Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF (BGIG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, OAKM achieves a -0.14% return, which is significantly lower than BGIG's 10.33% return.

OAKM

• 1D: 1.91%
• 1M: 0.18%
• YTD: -0.14%
• 6M: 2.57%
• 1Y: 16.15%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BGIG

• 1D: 0.45%
• 1M: 2.02%
• YTD: 10.33%
• 6M: 10.33%
• 1Y: 20.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

OAKM vs. BGIG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
OAKM Oakmark U.S. Large Cap ETF	-0.14%	21.46%	-4.83%
BGIG Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF	10.33%	12.49%	-3.02%

Correlation

The correlation between OAKM and BGIG is 0.61, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 4, 2024	0.68

The correlation between OAKM and BGIG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

OAKM vs. BGIG — Risk / Return Rank

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

OAKM

OAKM Risk / Return Rank: 38
OAKM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
OAKM Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
OAKM Omega Ratio Rank: 34
OAKM Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
OAKM Martin Ratio Rank: 38

BGIG

BGIG Risk / Return Rank: 72
BGIG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
BGIG Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
BGIG Omega Ratio Rank: 70
BGIG Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
BGIG Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

OAKM vs. BGIG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Oakmark U.S. Large Cap ETF (OAKM) and Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF (BGIG). 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.

	OAKM	BGIG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.24	2.28	-1.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.84	3.27	-1.43
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.41	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.26	3.53	-1.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.85	13.58	-7.74
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

OAKM vs. BGIG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current OAKM Sharpe Ratio is 1.24, which is lower than the BGIG Sharpe Ratio of 2.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of OAKM and BGIG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	OAKM	BGIG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.24	2.28	-1.04
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.61	1.40	-0.78

Drawdowns

OAKM vs. BGIG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum OAKM drawdown since its inception was -15.24%, which is greater than BGIG's maximum drawdown of -13.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for OAKM and BGIG.

Drawdown Indicators

	OAKM	BGIG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.24%	-13.24%	-2.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.19%	-5.81%	-1.38%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.61%	0.00%	-2.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.77%	-1.70%	-1.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.77%	1.51%	+1.26%

Volatility

OAKM vs. BGIG - Volatility Comparison

Oakmark U.S. Large Cap ETF (OAKM) has a higher volatility of 3.63% compared to Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF (BGIG) at 2.59%. This indicates that OAKM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BGIG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	OAKM	BGIG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.63%	2.59%	+1.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.56%	6.72%	+2.84%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.10%	8.99%	+4.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.55%	11.94%	+4.61%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.55%	11.94%	+4.61%

OAKM vs. BGIG - Expense Ratio Comparison

OAKM has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than BGIG's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

OAKM vs. BGIG - Dividend Comparison

OAKM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.67%, less than BGIG's 1.74% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BGIG Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF	1.74%	1.89%	2.02%	0.78%
OAKM Oakmark U.S. Large Cap ETF	0.67%	0.67%	0.04%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both OAKM and BGIG in my portfolio?

OAKM and BGIG have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, OAKM or BGIG?

OAKM has higher volatility (3.63%) compared to BGIG (2.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, OAKM dropped -15.24% vs BGIG's -13.24%.

Which ETF is better, OAKM or BGIG?

On 1-year performance, BGIG leads with 20.42% vs 16.15% for OAKM. On fees, BGIG is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, BGIG has been the lower-risk option at 2.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, OAKM or BGIG?

Over the 1-year period, BGIG has performed better with a 20.42% return vs 16.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, OAKM or BGIG?

BGIG is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for OAKM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, OAKM or BGIG?

BGIG has the higher dividend yield at 1.74%, compared with 0.67% for OAKM.

What is the main difference between OAKM and BGIG?

They also come from different issuers: Oakmark and Bahl & Gaynor. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for OAKM and 0.45% for BGIG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BGIG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.28 vs 1.24), 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.