Skip to content
etf.net

BCGD vs SQS

Baron Global Durable Advantage ETF

BCGDCNYSE

Sapient Quality Select ETF

SQSCNasdaq

Overlap

22.3%by weight

Expense ratio

BCGD −0.05pt a year

BCGD0.75%SQS0.80%

Avg volume · 30D

SQS 5.6×the volume

BCGD2.04KSQS11.3K

BCGD vs SQS Performance

Jul 31, 2026 – Nov 2, 2026

−0.9%BCGD−2.8%SQS

Jul 31, 2026 to Nov 2, 2026. BCGD −0.9%. SQS −2.8%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.−2%0%2%4%Jul 2026Sep 2026Nov 2026
Expense ratio
BCGD 0.75%, better
SQS 0.80%
Fund size
BCGD $10M
SQS $1.35B
Holdings
BCGD 41
SQS 35
Avg volume (30D)
BCGD 2.04K sh
SQS 11.3K sh, better
NAV per share
BCGD $25.97
SQS $27.05
52W range

ETF.net Grade

BCGD: Cost 52, Risk 32, Mission not scored, Tradability 32, Holdings 57, Durability 39. SQS: Cost 29, Risk 59, Mission not scored, Tradability 58, Holdings 35, Durability 68.
Pillar letters and Scores for BCGD, SQS, with each pillar’s weight
PillarBCGDSQS
Cost30% weightC52HigherD29
Mission25% weightNot scoredNot scored
Risk15% weightD32B59Higher
Tradability15% weightD32B58Higher
Holdings10% weightB57HigherD35
Durability5% weightD39B68Higher

Rank among Global Active Quality / Moat funds

How we build Categories ›
Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Same Category. BCGD and SQS are both graded against the same 5 Global Active Quality / Moat funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Global Active Quality / Moat⁠

Category · 5 funds
See all 5 ›

SQS ranks 3rd and BCGD 4th of 5 funds in the Global Active Quality / Moat Category.

  1. Rank 1BFITZFitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETFScore 63
  2. Rank 2BMOTGVanEck Morningstar Global Wide Moat ETFScore 62
  3. Rank 3CSQSSapient Quality Select ETFScore 44
  4. Rank 4CBCGDBaron Global Durable Advantage ETFScore 43
  5. Rank 5DETFTFundsmith Equity ETFScore 26

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

BCGDCBaron Global Durable Advantage ETF

SQSCSapient Quality Select ETF

In short

BCGD No data

SQS A boutique manager's concentrated take on global quality and growth, in an ETF wrapper. Actively picked, non-diversified, no index to hide behind, and it showed up with multi-billion-dollar size for a 2026 debut.

Stated mandate

BCGD No data

SQS The Fund seeks long-term total return. It is actively managed and invests in companies that the sub-adviser believes have quality and growth characteristics across sectors and geographies.

Why people hold it

BCGD No data

  • SQS Genuinely active: the sub-adviser buys companies it judges to have quality and growth traits across sectors and geographies, US and overseas, rather than tracking a global index.sec.gov
  • Non-diversified by design, so high-conviction names can carry real weight instead of being diluted across thousands of tickers.etfarchitect.com
  • Rare for a 2026 launch: it is already a multi-billion-dollar fund, and it sits in the upper half of its global active-equity peer group.

Worth knowing

BCGD No data

  • SQS 0.80% a year, above the 0.69% median for its peer group and many times what index-built global rivals like GSWO (0.15%) or AVGE (0.25%) charge.
  • Trades lightly for its size, so bid/ask spreads can run wider than on household-name global funds.
  • Live since March 2026, so the track record is short, and a concentrated book means single names move the ride more.etfarchitect.com

Full BCGD profile⁠

Full SQS profile⁠

BCGD vs SQS Holdings

How BCGD and SQS differ

Overlap by weight

22.3%

Shared holdings make up 30.6% of SQS and 27.9% of BCGD.

Level by level

  • Holdings7 in both22.3%
  • Countryby domicile66.8%
  • Asset classEquity100%

Sector

No Sector split for SQS.

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Country weights in BCGD and SQS, widest gap first
CountryMore in BCGDMore in SQS
United StatesSQS +32.8 points
CanadaBCGD +5.8 points
TaiwanBCGD +4.9 points
NetherlandsBCGD +4.5 points
SwedenBCGD +4.3 points
JapanBCGD +4.1 points
BrazilBCGD +3.8 points
ItalyBCGD +1.8 points
Other countries (4)BCGD +3.7 points

Outside the US: BCGD 60% developed, 40% emerging.

Concentration

Weight in the 10 largest Holdings

  • BCGD49.5%
  • SQS56.0%

Securities held

  • BCGD40
  • SQS35

Asset class

BCGD
Equity
SQS
Equity

Holdings

  • Only in BCGD33
  • In both7
  • Only in SQS28

Only in BCGD

33 securities, 70.8% of BCGD by weight

  • Visa Inc Class A Shares6.64%
  • Alphabet Inc Class C4.41%
  • S+p Global Inc4.37%

Only in SQS

28 securities, 69.5% of SQS by weight

  • Apple Inc8.08%
  • Alphabet Inc6.35%
  • Microsoft Corp5.98%

Weight gaps

All 7 Holdings in both funds, largest gap first.

Holding weights in BCGD and SQS, widest gap first
HoldingMore in BCGDMore in SQS
Taiwan Semiconductor Sp AdrTSMBCGD +4.58 points
NVIDIA CorpNVDASQS +3.28 points
Broadcom IncAVGOSQS +2.74 points
Eli Lilly & CoLLYSQS +2.27 points
Amazon.com IncAMZNBCGD +0.40 points
Meta Platforms Inc Class AMETABCGD +0.39 points
Monolithic Power Systems IncMPWRBCGD +0.29 points

All 42 BCGD holdings⁠All SQS holdings⁠

How we measure overlap

Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.

BCGD vs SQS Cost

Overpaying SQS vs BCGD

$864

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

  • BCGD 0.75%

    $14,482

  • SQS 0.80%

    $15,346

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • BCGD 0.75%
  • SQS 0.80%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5K$10K$15K$20K051015202530SQS $15,346BCGD $14,482

Year by year

YearBCGDSQSOverpaying
10$1,336$1,422$86
20$5,078$5,393$315
30$14,482$15,346$864

Expense ratio

  • 0.75%BCGD, cheaper
  • 0.80%SQS
  • Middle half of Global Active Quality / Moat funds
  • Median 0.75%

BCGD 2nd cheapest of 5 funds

SQS 4th cheapest of 5 funds

BCGD vs SQS Dividends

Last 12 months to Nov 2, 2026
Payout (12M)
BCGD None
SQS None

Distribution history

BCGDAll BCGD payments⁠

No distribution history available.

SQSAll SQS payments⁠

No distribution history available.

BCGD vs SQS Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
BCGD 1.08SQS 1.12

Popular comparisons

  • BCGDCvsFITZB

    Baron Global Durable Advantage ETF · Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.75% · 0.75%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • SQSCvsFITZB

    Sapient Quality Select ETF · Fitz-Gerald Must Have Portfolio ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.80% · 0.75%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • BCGDCvsMOTGB

    Baron Global Durable Advantage ETF · VanEck Morningstar Global Wide Moat ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.75% · 0.52%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • SQSCvsMOTGB

    Sapient Quality Select ETF · VanEck Morningstar Global Wide Moat ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.80% · 0.52%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • BCGDCvsETFTD

    Baron Global Durable Advantage ETF · Fundsmith Equity ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.75% · 1.00%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • SQSCvsETFTD

    Sapient Quality Select ETF · Fundsmith Equity ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.80% · 1.00%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.