PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ABFL vs. MGC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ABFL vs. MGC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) and Vanguard Mega Cap ETF (MGC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ABFL achieves a 17.63% return, which is significantly higher than MGC's 10.80% return.


ABFL

1D
0.02%
1M
6.04%
YTD
17.63%
6M
17.18%
1Y
20.72%
3Y*
19.01%
5Y*
12.77%
10Y*

MGC

1D
-0.79%
1M
5.59%
YTD
10.80%
6M
10.75%
1Y
29.68%
3Y*
23.87%
5Y*
14.70%
10Y*
16.36%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ABFL vs. MGC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
ABFL
Abacus FCF Leaders ETF
17.63%8.07%18.26%22.97%-14.60%30.66%18.30%26.03%-6.26%15.23%
MGC
Vanguard Mega Cap ETF
10.80%19.31%27.16%29.77%-19.95%27.58%21.57%31.14%-3.45%10.67%

Correlation

The correlation between ABFL and MGC is 0.79, 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

0.79

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.85

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.91

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 25, 2017

0.90

The correlation between ABFL and MGC shifts across timeframes, from 0.79 (1 year) to 0.91 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

ABFL vs. MGC - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
ABFL
MGC

Technology

35.2%
39.3%

Industrials

20.9%
6.5%

Healthcare

12.5%
8.9%

Energy

7.9%
2.6%

Consumer Defensive

7.3%
4.8%

Consumer Cyclical

6.3%
10.1%

Basic Materials

4.3%
1.2%

Communication Services

2.9%
13.1%

Financial Services

2.8%
11.7%

Real Estate

-

1.0%

Utilities

-

1.0%

Technology

ABFL
35.2%
MGC
39.3%

Industrials

ABFL
20.9%
MGC
6.5%

Healthcare

ABFL
12.5%
MGC
8.9%

Energy

ABFL
7.9%
MGC
2.6%

Consumer Defensive

ABFL
7.3%
MGC
4.8%

Consumer Cyclical

ABFL
6.3%
MGC
10.1%

Basic Materials

ABFL
4.3%
MGC
1.2%

Communication Services

ABFL
2.9%
MGC
13.1%

Financial Services

ABFL
2.8%
MGC
11.7%

Real Estate

ABFL

-

MGC
1.0%

Utilities

ABFL

-

MGC
1.0%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

ABFL vs. MGC — Risk / Return Rank

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

ABFL
ABFL Risk / Return Rank: 4545
Overall Rank
ABFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ABFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
ABFL Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
ABFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
ABFL Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank

MGC
MGC Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
MGC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MGC Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
MGC Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
MGC Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
MGC Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

ABFL vs. MGC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) and Vanguard Mega Cap ETF (MGC). 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.


ABFLMGCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.38

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

1.43

-0.20

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.90

3.03

-0.12

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.41

13.61

-4.21

ABFL vs. MGC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ABFL Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is lower than the MGC Sharpe Ratio of 2.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ABFL and MGC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ABFLMGCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.36

2.42

-1.06

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.75

0.86

-0.10

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.90

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.79

0.60

+0.19

Drawdowns

ABFL vs. MGC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ABFL drawdown since its inception was -34.95%, smaller than the maximum MGC drawdown of -51.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ABFL and MGC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ABFLMGCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.95%

-51.93%

+16.98%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.17%

-9.85%

+2.68%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.92%

-19.28%

-0.64%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.88%

-25.74%

+3.86%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.07%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.79%

+0.79%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.99%

-7.06%

+2.07%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.21%

2.19%

+0.02%

Volatility

ABFL vs. MGC - Volatility Comparison

Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) has a higher volatility of 4.48% compared to Vanguard Mega Cap ETF (MGC) at 3.04%. This indicates that ABFL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MGC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ABFLMGCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.48%

3.04%

+1.44%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.70%

9.27%

+2.43%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.31%

12.32%

+2.99%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.09%

17.27%

-0.18%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.71%

18.21%

+0.50%

ABFL vs. MGC - Expense Ratio Comparison

ABFL has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than MGC's 0.05% expense ratio.


Dividends

ABFL vs. MGC - Dividend Comparison

ABFL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%, less than MGC's 0.87% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ABFL
Abacus FCF Leaders ETF
0.53%0.62%0.70%0.94%1.36%9.63%0.41%0.72%0.62%0.40%0.00%0.00%
MGC
Vanguard Mega Cap ETF
0.87%0.93%1.15%1.35%1.65%1.17%1.45%1.81%2.10%1.83%2.14%2.11%

Frequently Asked Questions


ABFL and MGC have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ABFL has higher volatility (4.48%) compared to MGC (3.04%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ABFL dropped -34.95% vs MGC's -51.93%.

On 5-year performance, MGC leads with 14.70% vs 12.77% for ABFL. On fees, MGC is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, MGC has been the lower-risk option at 3.04%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, MGC has performed better with a 14.70% return vs 12.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MGC is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for ABFL.

MGC has the higher dividend yield at 0.87%, compared with 0.53% for ABFL.

They also come from different issuers: Abacus and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for ABFL and 0.05% for MGC.

MGC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.42 vs 1.36), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ABFL and MGC

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer