THLV vs. BDGS

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

THLV (THOR Equal Weight Low Volatility ETF) and BDGS (Bridges Capital Tactical ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - THLV is a Equal Weight fund tracking the THOR Equal Weight Low Volatility Index, while BDGS is a Tactical Allocation fund actively managed by Bridges. THLV is passively managed, while BDGS is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, THLV returned 9.68%/yr vs 13.19%/yr for BDGS. Their 0.50 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. THLV charges 0.64%/yr vs 0.87%/yr for BDGS.

Performance

THLV vs. BDGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in THOR Equal Weight Low Volatility ETF (THLV) 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, THLV achieves a 8.51% return, which is significantly higher than BDGS's 4.35% return.

THLV

• 1D: -0.45%
• 1M: -2.87%
• 6M: 2.97%
• YTD: 8.51%
• 1Y: 14.95%
• 3Y*: 9.68%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.21%

BDGS

• 1D: 0.56%
• 1M: -0.71%
• 6M: 4.08%
• YTD: 4.35%
• 1Y: 10.14%
• 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
THLV THOR Equal Weight Low Volatility ETF	$336.07K	$335.31K	$358.63K

THLV vs. BDGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
THLV THOR Equal Weight Low Volatility ETF	8.51%	10.50%	9.52%	8.10%
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	4.35%	10.61%	19.07%	8.23%

Correlation

The correlation between THLV and BDGS is 0.39, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.39
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 11, 2023	0.50

The correlation between THLV and BDGS shifts across timeframes, from 0.39 (1 year) to 0.50 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

THLV vs. BDGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	THLV	BDGS
Energy	17.5%	2.4%
Technology	17.5%	38.9%
Consumer Cyclical	15.5%	12.2%
Real Estate	14.0%	1.5%
Utilities	14.0%	1.8%
Financial Services	13.8%	9.3%
Industrials	13.8%	6.8%
Consumer Defensive	13.7%	3.6%
Healthcare	12.5%	7.1%
Basic Materials	11.3%	1.3%
Communication Services	0.1%	15.1%

Return for Risk

THLV vs. BDGS — Risk / Return Rank

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

THLV

THLV Risk / Return Rank: 55
THLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
THLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
THLV Omega Ratio Rank: 53
THLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
THLV Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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.

THLV vs. BDGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for THOR Equal Weight Low Volatility ETF (THLV) 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.

	THLV	BDGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.35	1.38	-0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.93	2.12	-0.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.28	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.10	2.04	+0.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.23	8.70	-2.47

THLV vs. BDGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current THLV Sharpe Ratio is 1.35, which is comparable to the BDGS Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of THLV 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

THLV vs. BDGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum THLV drawdown since its inception was -13.15%, which is greater than BDGS's maximum drawdown of -9.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for THLV and BDGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	THLV	BDGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.15%	-9.12%	-4.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.66%	-4.76%	-1.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.15%	-9.12%	-4.03%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.16%	-2.03%	-1.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.66%	-0.69%	-2.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.24%	1.12%	+1.12%

Volatility

THLV vs. BDGS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for THOR Equal Weight Low Volatility ETF (THLV) is 2.84%, while Bridges Capital Tactical ETF (BDGS) has a volatility of 3.21%. This indicates that THLV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BDGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	THLV	BDGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.84%	3.21%	-0.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.01%	6.11%	+1.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.37%	7.06%	+3.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.74%	8.30%	+3.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.74%	8.30%	+3.44%

THLV vs. BDGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

THLV has a 0.64% expense ratio, which is lower than BDGS's 0.87% expense ratio.

Dividends

THLV vs. BDGS - Dividend Comparison

THLV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.63%, more than BDGS's 0.53% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BDGS Bridges Capital Tactical ETF	0.53%	0.55%	1.81%	0.84%	0.00%
THLV THOR Equal Weight Low Volatility ETF	1.63%	1.77%	1.25%	2.72%	0.62%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both THLV and BDGS in my portfolio?

THLV and BDGS have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, THLV or BDGS?

BDGS has higher volatility (3.21%) compared to THLV (2.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, THLV dropped -13.15% vs BDGS's -9.12%.

Which ETF is better, THLV or BDGS?

On 3-year performance, BDGS leads with 13.19% vs 9.68% for THLV. On fees, THLV is cheaper at 0.64% per year. On volatility, THLV has been the lower-risk option at 2.84%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, THLV or BDGS?

Over the 3-year period, BDGS has performed better with a 13.19% return vs 9.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, THLV or BDGS?

THLV is cheaper with a 0.64% expense ratio, compared with 0.87% for BDGS.

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

THLV has the higher dividend yield at 1.63%, compared with 0.53% for BDGS.

What is the main difference between THLV and BDGS?

THLV is categorized as Equal Weight, while BDGS is Tactical Allocation. They also come from different issuers: THOR and Bridges. Their fees differ too: 0.64% for THLV and 0.87% for BDGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BDGS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.38 vs 1.35), 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.