VOOV vs. BGIG

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

VOOV (Vanguard S&P 500 Value ETF) and BGIG (Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. VOOV is passively managed, while BGIG is actively managed. Over the past year, VOOV returned 22.81% vs 19.51% for BGIG. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. VOOV charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for BGIG.

Performance

VOOV vs. BGIG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Vanguard S&P 500 Value ETF (VOOV) 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, VOOV achieves a 8.52% return, which is significantly lower than BGIG's 9.84% return.

VOOV

• 1D: 0.94%
• 1M: 2.41%
• YTD: 8.52%
• 6M: 9.07%
• 1Y: 22.81%
• 3Y*: 16.15%
• 5Y*: 10.85%
• 10Y*: 11.86%

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)

VOOV vs. BGIG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
VOOV Vanguard S&P 500 Value ETF	8.52%	13.10%	12.21%	8.89%
BGIG Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF	9.84%	12.49%	16.84%	4.55%

Correlation

The correlation between VOOV 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	0.83

The correlation between VOOV and BGIG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

VOOV vs. BGIG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	VOOV	BGIG
Technology	19.0%	24.6%
Financial Services	15.0%	14.8%
Healthcare	11.6%	14.6%
Consumer Cyclical	11.1%	5.4%
Industrials	11.0%	10.6%
Consumer Defensive	9.5%	6.9%
Energy	7.6%	11.2%
Utilities	4.6%	7.9%
Basic Materials	3.5%	0.6%
Real Estate	3.4%	3.5%
Communication Services	3.3%	-

Return for Risk

VOOV vs. BGIG — Risk / Return Rank

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

VOOV

VOOV Risk / Return Rank: 73
VOOV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
VOOV Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
VOOV Omega Ratio Rank: 70
VOOV Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
VOOV Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

VOOV vs. BGIG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard S&P 500 Value ETF (VOOV) 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.

	VOOV	BGIG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.32	2.18	+0.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.23	3.13	+0.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	1.39	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.65	3.37	+0.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.95	12.97	+0.98
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

VOOV vs. BGIG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VOOV Sharpe Ratio is 2.32, which is comparable to the BGIG Sharpe Ratio of 2.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VOOV 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

	VOOV	BGIG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.32	2.18	+0.14
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.75	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.70	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.75	1.38	-0.63

Drawdowns

VOOV vs. BGIG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VOOV drawdown since its inception was -37.31%, which is greater than BGIG's maximum drawdown of -13.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VOOV and BGIG.

Drawdown Indicators

	VOOV	BGIG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.31%	-13.24%	-24.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.27%	-5.81%	-0.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.55%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.10%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-37.31%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.28%	+0.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.84%	-1.70%	-2.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.64%	1.51%	+0.13%

Volatility

VOOV vs. BGIG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Vanguard S&P 500 Value ETF (VOOV) is 2.08%, while Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF (BGIG) has a volatility of 2.57%. This indicates that VOOV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BGIG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	VOOV	BGIG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.08%	2.57%	-0.49%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.12%	6.72%	+0.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.86%	9.00%	+0.86%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.46%	11.94%	+2.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.94%	11.94%	+5.00%

VOOV vs. BGIG - Expense Ratio Comparison

VOOV has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than BGIG's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

VOOV vs. BGIG - Dividend Comparison

VOOV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.66%, 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%
VOOV Vanguard S&P 500 Value ETF	1.66%	1.76%	2.10%	1.69%	2.19%	1.87%	2.45%	2.10%	2.65%	2.13%	2.24%	2.36%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both VOOV and BGIG in my portfolio?

VOOV 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, VOOV or BGIG?

BGIG has higher volatility (2.57%) compared to VOOV (2.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VOOV dropped -37.31% vs BGIG's -13.24%.

Which ETF is better, VOOV or BGIG?

On 1-year performance, VOOV leads with 22.81% vs 19.51% for BGIG. On fees, VOOV is cheaper at 0.07% per year. On volatility, VOOV has been the lower-risk option at 2.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, VOOV or BGIG?

Over the 1-year period, VOOV has performed better with a 22.81% return vs 19.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, VOOV or BGIG?

VOOV is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for BGIG.

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

BGIG has the higher dividend yield at 1.75%, compared with 1.66% for VOOV.

What is the main difference between VOOV and BGIG?

They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and Bahl & Gaynor. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for VOOV and 0.45% for BGIG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

VOOV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.32 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.