VONV vs. BGIG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

VONV (Vanguard Russell 1000 Value ETF) and BGIG (Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. VONV is passively managed, while BGIG is actively managed. Over the past year, VONV returned 28.35% vs 19.51% for BGIG. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. VONV charges 0.06%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for BGIG.

Performance

VONV vs. BGIG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Vanguard Russell 1000 Value ETF (VONV) 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, VONV achieves a 14.28% return, which is significantly higher than BGIG's 9.84% return.

VONV

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 4.28%
• YTD: 14.28%
• 6M: 14.88%
• 1Y: 28.35%
• 3Y*: 18.56%
• 5Y*: 10.30%
• 10Y*: 11.35%

BGIG

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 1.82%
• YTD: 9.84%
• 6M: 9.56%
• 1Y: 19.51%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

VONV vs. BGIG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
VONV Vanguard Russell 1000 Value ETF	14.28%	15.81%	14.28%	5.76%
BGIG Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF	9.84%	12.49%	16.84%	4.55%

Correlation

The correlation between VONV and BGIG is 0.80, 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	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 18, 2023	0.85

The correlation between VONV and BGIG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

VONV vs. BGIG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	VONV	BGIG
Financial Services	18.9%	14.8%
Technology	14.9%	24.6%
Industrials	13.1%	10.6%
Healthcare	10.9%	14.6%
Communication Services	8.5%	-
Consumer Cyclical	7.3%	5.4%
Consumer Defensive	7.2%	6.9%
Energy	7.0%	11.2%
Utilities	4.4%	7.9%
Real Estate	4.1%	3.5%
Basic Materials	3.8%	0.6%

Return for Risk

VONV vs. BGIG — Risk / Return Rank

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

VONV

VONV Risk / Return Rank: 81
VONV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
VONV Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
VONV Omega Ratio Rank: 78
VONV Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
VONV Martin Ratio Rank: 84

BGIG

BGIG Risk / Return Rank: 68
BGIG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
BGIG Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
BGIG Omega Ratio Rank: 65
BGIG Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
BGIG Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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.

VONV vs. BGIG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Russell 1000 Value ETF (VONV) 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.

	VONV	BGIG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.64	2.18	+0.46
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.73	3.13	+0.60
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.39	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.18	3.37	+0.80
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.54	12.97	+4.57
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

VONV vs. BGIG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VONV Sharpe Ratio is 2.64, which is comparable to the BGIG Sharpe Ratio of 2.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VONV 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	VONV	BGIG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.64	2.18	+0.46
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.70	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.66	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.71	1.38	-0.67

Drawdowns

VONV vs. BGIG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VONV drawdown since its inception was -38.21%, which is greater than BGIG's maximum drawdown of -13.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VONV and BGIG.

Drawdown Indicators

	VONV	BGIG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-38.21%	-13.24%	-24.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.81%	-5.81%	-1.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.70%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.87%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-38.21%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.28%	+0.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.91%	-1.70%	-2.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.62%	1.51%	+0.11%

Volatility

VONV vs. BGIG - Volatility Comparison

Vanguard Russell 1000 Value ETF (VONV) has a higher volatility of 2.94% compared to Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF (BGIG) at 2.57%. This indicates that VONV'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

	VONV	BGIG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.94%	2.57%	+0.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.09%	6.72%	+1.37%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.81%	9.00%	+1.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.77%	11.94%	+2.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.24%	11.94%	+5.30%

VONV vs. BGIG - Expense Ratio Comparison

VONV has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than BGIG's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

VONV vs. BGIG - Dividend Comparison

VONV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.63%, less than BGIG's 1.75% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BGIG Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF	1.75%	1.89%	2.02%	0.78%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VONV Vanguard Russell 1000 Value ETF	1.63%	1.82%	1.97%	2.10%	2.22%	1.67%	2.25%	2.30%	2.56%	2.18%	2.39%	2.38%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both VONV and BGIG in my portfolio?

VONV and BGIG 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, VONV or BGIG?

VONV has higher volatility (2.94%) compared to BGIG (2.57%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VONV dropped -38.21% vs BGIG's -13.24%.

Which ETF is better, VONV or BGIG?

On 1-year performance, VONV leads with 28.35% vs 19.51% for BGIG. On fees, VONV is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, BGIG has been the lower-risk option at 2.57%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, VONV or BGIG?

Over the 1-year period, VONV has performed better with a 28.35% return vs 19.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, VONV or BGIG?

VONV is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for BGIG.

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

BGIG has the higher dividend yield at 1.75%, compared with 1.63% for VONV.

What is the main difference between VONV and BGIG?

They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and Bahl & Gaynor. Their fees differ too: 0.06% for VONV and 0.45% for BGIG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

VONV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.64 vs 2.18), 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.