ONOF vs. BDGS

Last updated Jun 17, 2026

ONOF (Global X Adaptive U.S. Risk Management ETF) and BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ONOF is a Tactical Allocation fund tracking the Adaptive Wealth Strategies U.S. Risk Management Index, while BDGS is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Bridges. ONOF is passively managed, while BDGS is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, ONOF returned 12.41%/yr vs 13.87%/yr for BDGS. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ONOF charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for BDGS.

Performance

ONOF vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Adaptive U.S. Risk Management ETF (ONOF) 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, ONOF achieves a 6.71% return, which is significantly higher than BDGS's 5.41% return.

ONOF

• 1D: -0.47%
• 1M: 1.73%
• YTD: 6.71%
• 6M: 7.60%
• 1Y: 21.65%
• 3Y*: 12.41%
• 5Y*: 9.14%
• 10Y*: —

BDGS

• 1D: -0.51%
• 1M: 0.26%
• YTD: 5.41%
• 6M: 5.72%
• 1Y: 13.18%
• 3Y*: 13.87%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ONOF vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ONOF Global X Adaptive U.S. Risk Management ETF	6.71%	8.90%	19.45%	9.45%
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	5.41%	10.61%	19.07%	8.23%

Correlation

The correlation between ONOF and BDGS is 0.78, 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	0.78
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2023	0.72

The correlation between ONOF and BDGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

ONOF vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

ONOF

ONOF Risk / Return Rank: 60
ONOF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
ONOF Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
ONOF Omega Ratio Rank: 57
ONOF Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
ONOF Martin Ratio Rank: 62

BDGS

BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 73
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 77
BDGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
BDGS Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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.

ONOF vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Adaptive U.S. Risk Management ETF (ONOF) 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.

	ONOF	BDGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.86	2.12	-0.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.51	3.19	-0.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.44	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.17	3.28	-0.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.59	14.86	-4.27

ONOF vs. BDGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ONOF Sharpe Ratio is 1.86, which is comparable to the BDGS Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ONOF 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

ONOF vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ONOF drawdown since its inception was -26.21%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ONOF and BDGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	ONOF	BDGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.21%	-9.12%	-17.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.86%	-4.03%	-2.83%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.67%	-9.12%	-12.55%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.21%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.25%	-1.04%	-0.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.12%	-0.65%	-5.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.05%	0.89%	+1.16%

Volatility

ONOF vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison

Global X Adaptive U.S. Risk Management ETF (ONOF) has a higher volatility of 4.36% compared to Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) at 1.91%. This indicates that ONOF'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

	ONOF	BDGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.36%	1.91%	+2.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.73%	5.00%	+3.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.73%	6.25%	+5.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.39%	8.21%	+6.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.38%	8.21%	+6.17%

ONOF vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

ONOF has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.87% expense ratio.

Dividends

ONOF vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison

ONOF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.29%, more than BDGS's 0.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	0.52%	0.55%	1.81%	0.84%	0.00%	0.00%
ONOF Global X Adaptive U.S. Risk Management ETF	1.29%	1.38%	0.93%	1.37%	1.92%	0.69%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ONOF and BDGS in my portfolio?

ONOF and BDGS have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ONOF or BDGS?

ONOF has higher volatility (4.36%) compared to BDGS (1.91%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ONOF dropped -26.21% vs BDGS's -9.12%.

Which ETF is better, ONOF or BDGS?

On 3-year performance, BDGS leads with 13.87% vs 12.41% for ONOF. On fees, ONOF is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, BDGS has been the lower-risk option at 1.91%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ONOF or BDGS?

Over the 3-year period, BDGS has performed better with a 13.87% return vs 12.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ONOF or BDGS?

ONOF is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for BDGS.

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

ONOF has the higher dividend yield at 1.29%, compared with 0.52% for BDGS.

What is the main difference between ONOF and BDGS?

ONOF is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while BDGS is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ONOF and 0.87% for BDGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BDGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.12 vs 1.86), 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.