PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
SIZE vs. BDGS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

SIZE vs. BDGS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SIZE (iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF) and BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SIZE is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the MSCI USA Low Size Index, while BDGS is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Bridges. SIZE is passively managed, while BDGS is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, SIZE returned 15.94%/yr vs 14.06%/yr for BDGS. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SIZE charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for BDGS.

Performance

SIZE vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF (SIZE) and Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SIZE achieves a 9.07% return, which is significantly higher than BDGS's 5.64% return.

SIZE

1D
-0.68%
1M
3.62%
YTD
9.07%
6M
8.29%
1Y
18.11%
3Y*
15.94%
5Y*
8.07%
10Y*
11.76%

BDGS

1D
-0.29%
1M
1.26%
YTD
5.64%
6M
5.65%
1Y
13.85%
3Y*
14.06%
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SIZE vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023
SIZE
iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF		9.07%10.51%14.37%15.97%
BDGS
Bridges Capital Tactical ETF		5.64%10.61%19.07%8.31%

Correlation

The correlation between SIZE and BDGS is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.49

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.59

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 12, 2023

0.59

The correlation between SIZE and BDGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.49 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.

SIZE vs. BDGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
SIZE
BDGS

Technology

19.9%
37.4%

Industrials

16.1%
6.6%

Financial Services

13.5%
9.3%

Consumer Cyclical

9.8%
10.9%

Healthcare

9.6%
7.5%

Real Estate

5.7%
1.5%

Consumer Defensive

5.7%
4.1%

Utilities

5.5%
1.9%

Energy

5.2%
2.6%

Basic Materials

4.8%
1.5%

Communication Services

4.1%
16.6%

Technology

SIZE
19.9%
BDGS
37.4%

Industrials

SIZE
16.1%
BDGS
6.6%

Financial Services

SIZE
13.5%
BDGS
9.3%

Consumer Cyclical

SIZE
9.8%
BDGS
10.9%

Healthcare

SIZE
9.6%
BDGS
7.5%

Real Estate

SIZE
5.7%
BDGS
1.5%

Consumer Defensive

SIZE
5.7%
BDGS
4.1%

Utilities

SIZE
5.5%
BDGS
1.9%

Energy

SIZE
5.2%
BDGS
2.6%

Basic Materials

SIZE
4.8%
BDGS
1.5%

Communication Services

SIZE
4.1%
BDGS
16.6%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF

Bridges Capital Tactical ETF

Often compared with SIZE:
SIZE vs. XLGSIZE vs. SPYSIZE vs. QUALSIZE vs. QDVA.DESIZE vs. VIGSIZE vs. VOOSIZE vs. DIVB
Often compared with BDGS:
BDGS vs. AFLGBDGS vs. AAPYBDGS vs. GDEBDGS vs. CFABDGS vs. AMZPBDGS vs. BEEZBDGS vs. MODL

Return for Risk

SIZE vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
SIZE
SIZE Risk / Return Rank: 4444
Overall Rank
SIZE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SIZE Sortino Ratio Rank: 4242
Sortino Ratio Rank
SIZE Omega Ratio Rank: 3838
Omega Ratio Rank
SIZE Calmar Ratio Rank: 4646
Calmar Ratio Rank
SIZE Martin Ratio Rank: 5252
Martin Ratio Rank
BDGS
BDGS Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
BDGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BDGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
BDGS Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
BDGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
BDGS Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

SIZE vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF (SIZE) 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.

SIZEBDGSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.43
2.29

-0.86

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.12
3.40

-1.28

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.47

-0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.28

3.45

-1.17

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.88

16.47

-7.60

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SIZE vs. BDGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SIZE Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is lower than the BDGS Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SIZE 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.

Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period

SIZEBDGSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.43

2.29

-0.86

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.47

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.63

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.68

1.76

-1.07

Drawdowns

SIZE vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SIZE drawdown since its inception was -39.15%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SIZE and BDGS.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

SIZEBDGSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-39.15%

-9.12%

-30.03%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.97%

-4.03%

-3.94%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.71%

-9.12%

-9.59%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-24.03%

—

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.15%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.68%

-0.83%

+0.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.18%

-0.64%

-3.54%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.04%

0.84%

+1.20%

Volatility

SIZE vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF (SIZE) has a higher volatility of 3.17% compared to Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) at 1.14%. This indicates that SIZE'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.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

SIZEBDGSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.17%

1.14%

+2.03%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.54%

4.74%

+4.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.73%

6.08%

+6.65%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.39%

8.21%

+9.18%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.69%

8.21%

+10.48%

SIZE vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

SIZE has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.87% expense ratio.

Dividends

SIZE vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison

SIZE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.42%, more than BDGS's 0.52% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BDGS
Bridges Capital Tactical ETF		0.52%0.55%1.81%0.84%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
SIZE
iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF		1.42%1.50%1.53%1.42%1.59%1.19%1.43%1.35%2.43%1.58%1.88%1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions

SIZE and BDGS have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SIZE has higher volatility (3.17%) compared to BDGS (1.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SIZE dropped -39.15% vs BDGS's -9.12%.

On 3-year performance, SIZE leads with 15.94% vs 14.06% for BDGS. On fees, SIZE is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, BDGS has been the lower-risk option at 1.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, SIZE has performed better with a 15.94% return vs 14.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SIZE is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for BDGS.

SIZE has the higher dividend yield at 1.42%, compared with 0.52% for BDGS.

SIZE is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while BDGS is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for SIZE and 0.87% for BDGS.

BDGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 1.43), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for SIZE and BDGS

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer