SCHB vs. BDGS

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

SCHB (Schwab U.S. Broad Market ETF) and BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. SCHB is passively managed, while BDGS is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, SCHB returned 18.96%/yr vs 13.19%/yr for BDGS. Their 0.78 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. SCHB charges 0.03%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for BDGS.

Performance

SCHB vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab U.S. Broad Market ETF (SCHB) 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, SCHB achieves a 10.58% return, which is significantly higher than BDGS's 4.35% return.

SCHB

• 1D: 0.59%
• 1M: -0.21%
• 6M: 8.84%
• YTD: 10.58%
• 1Y: 19.74%
• 3Y*: 18.96%
• 5Y*: 11.79%
• 10Y*: 14.63%
• ALL TIME*: 14.17%

BDGS

• 1D: 0.56%
• 1M: -0.85%
• 6M: 4.08%
• YTD: 4.35%
• 1Y: 9.70%
• 3Y*: 13.19%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.11%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	$35.83K	$93.96K	$183.58K
SCHB Schwab U.S. Broad Market ETF	$212.56M	$205.35M	$255.93M

SCHB vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
SCHB Schwab U.S. Broad Market ETF	10.58%	16.94%	23.93%	17.20%
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	4.35%	10.61%	19.07%	8.23%

Correlation

The correlation between SCHB and BDGS is 0.80, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.80
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2023	0.78

The correlation between SCHB and BDGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

SCHB vs. BDGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SCHB	BDGS
Technology	35.8%	38.9%
Financial Services	11.9%	9.3%
Industrials	9.8%	6.8%
Healthcare	9.6%	7.1%
Consumer Cyclical	9.6%	12.2%
Communication Services	9.2%	15.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.4%	3.6%
Energy	3.2%	2.4%
Real Estate	2.4%	1.5%
Utilities	2.2%	1.8%
Basic Materials	1.9%	1.3%

Return for Risk

SCHB vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

SCHB

SCHB Risk / Return Rank: 67
SCHB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
SCHB Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
SCHB Omega Ratio Rank: 64
SCHB Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
SCHB Martin Ratio Rank: 76

BDGS

BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 64
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 66
BDGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
BDGS Martin Ratio Rank: 71

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

SCHB vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab U.S. Broad Market ETF (SCHB) 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.

	SCHB	BDGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.51	1.38	+0.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.11	2.12	-0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.28	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.22	2.04	+0.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.54	8.70	+0.84

SCHB vs. BDGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SCHB Sharpe Ratio is 1.51, which is comparable to the BDGS Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SCHB 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

SCHB vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SCHB drawdown since its inception was -35.27%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCHB and BDGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	SCHB	BDGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.27%	-9.12%	-26.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.91%	-4.76%	-4.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.34%	-9.12%	-10.22%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.41%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-35.27%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.34%	-2.03%	+0.69%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.09%	-0.69%	-3.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.08%	1.12%	+0.96%

Volatility

SCHB vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison

Schwab U.S. Broad Market ETF (SCHB) has a higher volatility of 3.48% compared to Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) at 3.21%. This indicates that SCHB'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

	SCHB	BDGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.48%	3.21%	+0.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.28%	6.11%	+4.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.12%	7.06%	+6.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.36%	8.30%	+9.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.32%	8.30%	+10.02%

SCHB vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

SCHB has a 0.03% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.87% expense ratio.

Dividends

SCHB vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison

SCHB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.04%, more than BDGS's 0.53% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	0.53%	0.55%	1.81%	0.84%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SCHB Schwab U.S. Broad Market ETF	1.04%	1.11%	1.24%	1.40%	1.61%	1.21%	1.63%	1.80%	2.00%	1.65%	1.86%	2.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SCHB and BDGS in my portfolio?

SCHB and BDGS have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SCHB or BDGS?

SCHB has higher volatility (3.48%) compared to BDGS (3.21%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SCHB dropped -35.27% vs BDGS's -9.12%.

Which ETF is better, SCHB or BDGS?

On 3-year performance, SCHB leads with 18.96% vs 13.19% for BDGS. On fees, SCHB is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, BDGS has been the lower-risk option at 3.21%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SCHB or BDGS?

Over the 3-year period, SCHB has performed better with a 18.96% return vs 13.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SCHB or BDGS?

SCHB is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for BDGS.

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

SCHB has the higher dividend yield at 1.04%, compared with 0.53% for BDGS.

What is the main difference between SCHB and BDGS?

They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.03% for SCHB and 0.87% for BDGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SCHB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.51 vs 1.38), 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.