SEIV vs. BGIG

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

SEIV (SEI QiM U.S. Large Cap Value Active ETF) and BGIG (Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, SEIV returned 41.26% vs 21.92% for BGIG. Their 0.77 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. SEIV charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for BGIG.

Performance

SEIV vs. BGIG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SEI QiM U.S. Large Cap Value Active ETF (SEIV) 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, SEIV achieves a 19.61% return, which is significantly higher than BGIG's 14.06% return.

SEIV

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 3.04%
• 6M: 17.35%
• YTD: 19.61%
• 1Y: 41.26%
• 3Y*: 24.62%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 19.48%

BGIG

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 1.70%
• 6M: 10.58%
• YTD: 14.06%
• 1Y: 21.92%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 16.54%

*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)
BGIG Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF	$4.13M	$3.60M	$4.30M
SEIV SEI QiM U.S. Large Cap Value Active ETF	$8.91M	$9.09M	$6.11M

SEIV vs. BGIG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
SEIV SEI QiM U.S. Large Cap Value Active ETF	19.61%	27.43%	19.73%	9.39%
BGIG Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF	14.06%	12.49%	16.84%	3.57%

Correlation

The correlation between SEIV and BGIG is 0.66, 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.	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 15, 2023	0.77

The correlation between SEIV and BGIG shifts across timeframes, from 0.66 (1 year) to 0.77 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

SEIV vs. BGIG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SEIV	BGIG
Financial Services	23.0%	14.5%
Consumer Cyclical	18.5%	4.9%
Healthcare	18.1%	16.8%
Technology	17.0%	24.2%
Communication Services	6.5%	1.2%
Basic Materials	6.1%	0.6%
Consumer Defensive	3.9%	6.1%
Utilities	2.4%	7.3%
Industrials	1.9%	10.7%
Real Estate	1.2%	3.7%
Energy	0.9%	10.0%

Return for Risk

SEIV vs. BGIG — Risk / Return Rank

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

SEIV

SEIV Risk / Return Rank: 95
SEIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
SEIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
SEIV Omega Ratio Rank: 95
SEIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
SEIV Martin Ratio Rank: 95

BGIG

BGIG Risk / Return Rank: 91
BGIG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
BGIG Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
BGIG Omega Ratio Rank: 91
BGIG Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
BGIG Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

SEIV vs. BGIG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SEI QiM U.S. Large Cap Value Active ETF (SEIV) 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.

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.

	SEIV	BGIG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.07	2.41	+0.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.18	3.45	+0.73
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.55	1.43	+0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.66	3.69	+1.98
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	21.01	14.43	+6.57

SEIV vs. BGIG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SEIV Sharpe Ratio is 3.07, which is comparable to the BGIG Sharpe Ratio of 2.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SEIV 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.

Drawdowns

SEIV vs. BGIG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SEIV drawdown since its inception was -18.18%, which is greater than BGIG's maximum drawdown of -13.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SEIV and BGIG.

Drawdown Indicators

	SEIV	BGIG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.18%	-13.24%	-4.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.95%	-5.81%	-1.14%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.71%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.83%	-0.08%	-0.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.42%	-1.69%	-1.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.87%	1.48%	+0.39%

Volatility

SEIV vs. BGIG - Volatility Comparison

SEI QiM U.S. Large Cap Value Active ETF (SEIV) has a higher volatility of 3.31% compared to Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF (BGIG) at 2.07%. This indicates that SEIV'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

	SEIV	BGIG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.31%	2.07%	+1.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.48%	6.73%	+2.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.82%	8.95%	+3.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.54%	11.75%	+4.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.54%	11.75%	+4.79%

SEIV vs. BGIG - Expense Ratio Comparison

SEIV has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than BGIG's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

SEIV vs. BGIG - Dividend Comparison

SEIV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.44%, less than BGIG's 1.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BGIG Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF	1.69%	1.89%	2.02%	0.78%	0.00%
SEIV SEI QiM U.S. Large Cap Value Active ETF	1.44%	1.51%	1.66%	2.08%	1.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SEIV and BGIG in my portfolio?

SEIV and BGIG have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SEIV or BGIG?

SEIV has higher volatility (3.31%) compared to BGIG (2.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SEIV dropped -18.18% vs BGIG's -13.24%.

Which ETF is better, SEIV or BGIG?

On 1-year performance, SEIV leads with 41.26% vs 21.92% for BGIG. On fees, SEIV is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, BGIG has been the lower-risk option at 2.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SEIV or BGIG?

Over the 1-year period, SEIV has performed better with a 41.26% return vs 21.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SEIV or BGIG?

SEIV is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for BGIG.

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

BGIG has the higher dividend yield at 1.69%, compared with 1.44% for SEIV.

What is the main difference between SEIV and BGIG?

They also come from different issuers: SEI and Bahl & Gaynor. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for SEIV and 0.45% for BGIG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SEIV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.07 vs 2.40), 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.