BAGX vs FDWM
EA Bridgeway Aggressive Investors ETF vs Fidelity Womens Leadership ETF
Which is better, BAGX or FDWM?
BAGX has been ahead.
FDWM has a lower expense ratio. BAGX led over 1Y. BAGX is less concentrated, with 30.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 36.7%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BAGX | FDWM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.73% | 0.59%Best |
| AUM | $202M | $5M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.52% |
| Holdings | 94 | 82 |
| Volatility (annualized) | - | 17.3% |
| Max Drawdown | - | -29.1% |
| Top 10 Weight | 30.1%Best | 36.7% |
| Fund Family | Bridgeway Funds | Fidelity Investments (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jul 24, 2026 | Jun 15, 2021 |
Not shown on this pair: YTD Return, 1Y Return, 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), $10,000 over the window.
The two price series end 335 days apart, so a return over any period would be measuring two different stretches of market. Those rows are withheld. BAGX has data through Oct 14, 2026 and FDWM through Nov 13, 2025.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BAGX charges 0.73% per year while FDWM charges 0.59%. On a $10,000 position that is $73 vs $59 annually, a gap of $14 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BAGX currently yields 0.00% against 0.52% for FDWM.
Holdings Overlap
27.0% of BAGX's money is in holdings FDWM also owns. 34.4% of FDWM's money is in holdings BAGX also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
The two holdings books were reported 427 days apart, BAGX as of Oct 1, 2026 and FDWM as of Jul 31, 2025, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
14 positions in common, counted across the 94 positions we hold weights for in BAGX and 86 in FDWM, against full books of 94 and 82.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 70 positions for FDWM that do not appear in our book for BAGX (62.7% of the fund), and 75 for BAGX that do not appear in FDWM (69.3%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in BAGX | Weight in FDWM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANVIDIA Corporation | 5.56% | 7.02% | 1.46% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 3.70% | 7.10% | 3.40% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 4.73% | 5.91% | 1.18% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 1.61% | 4.73% | 3.12% |
| MUMicron Technology Inc . | 2.39% | 1.26% | 1.13% |
| MAMastercard Inc. Cl A | 0.95% | 1.32% | 0.37% |
| DELLDell Technologies -C | 1.63% | 0.57% | 1.06% |
| TPRTapestry Inc | 1.01% | 1.12% | 0.11% |
| HIGHARTFORD INSURANCE GROUP INC | 0.85% | 1.16% | 0.31% |
| BACBank Of America | 0.67% | 1.30% | 0.63% |
34.4% of FDWM is already inside BAGX.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BAGX or FDWM?
BAGX has an expense ratio of 0.73% while FDWM charges 0.59%. FDWM is the cheaper option, by $14 a year on a $10,000 investment.
What is the holdings overlap between BAGX and FDWM?
34.4% of FDWM's money is in holdings BAGX also owns. 34.4% of FDWM's is in holdings BAGX also owns. They hold 14 positions in common, counted across the 94 positions we hold weights for in BAGX and 86 in FDWM.
Which pays a higher dividend, BAGX or FDWM?
BAGX yields 0.00% while FDWM yields 0.52%, so FDWM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is FDWM better than BAGX?
FDWM has a lower expense ratio. BAGX led over 1Y. BAGX is less concentrated, with 30.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 36.7%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.