ABFL vs. MGC

Last updated Jul 23, 2026

ABFL (Abacus FCF Leaders ETF) and MGC (Vanguard Mega Cap ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. ABFL is actively managed, while MGC is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, ABFL returned 11.59%/yr vs 12.88%/yr for MGC. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ABFL charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.05%/yr for MGC.

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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ABFL achieves a 17.10% return, which is significantly higher than MGC's 7.98% return.

ABFL

• 1D: -0.18%
• 1M: 0.85%
• 6M: 14.90%
• YTD: 17.10%
• 1Y: 18.41%
• 3Y*: 16.55%
• 5Y*: 11.59%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 14.36%

MGC

• 1D: -1.42%
• 1M: 0.52%
• 6M: 7.68%
• YTD: 7.98%
• 1Y: 18.23%
• 3Y*: 20.37%
• 5Y*: 12.88%
• 10Y*: 15.66%
• ALL TIME*: 11.40%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ABFL Abacus FCF Leaders ETF	$1.37M	$1.32M	$1.27M
MGC Vanguard Mega Cap ETF	$23.43M	$26.56M	$29.29M

ABFL vs. MGC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ABFL Abacus FCF Leaders ETF	17.10%	8.07%	18.26%	22.97%	-14.60%	30.66%	18.30%	26.03%	-6.26%	15.11%
MGC Vanguard Mega Cap ETF	7.98%	19.31%	27.16%	29.77%	-19.95%	27.58%	21.57%	31.14%	-3.45%	10.40%

Correlation

The correlation between ABFL and MGC is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.81
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.85
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 24, 2017	0.90

The correlation between ABFL and MGC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

ABFL vs. MGC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ABFL	MGC
Technology	42.0%	43.0%
Healthcare	15.3%	9.2%
Consumer Cyclical	15.0%	9.2%
Industrials	11.4%	6.7%
Financial Services	5.8%	11.3%
Consumer Defensive	4.8%	4.4%
Basic Materials	2.1%	1.1%
Energy	1.8%	1.1%
Communication Services	1.8%	11.2%
Real Estate	-	0.9%
Utilities	-	0.8%

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: 52
ABFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
ABFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
ABFL Omega Ratio Rank: 40
ABFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
ABFL Martin Ratio Rank: 63

MGC

MGC Risk / Return Rank: 52
MGC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
MGC Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
MGC Omega Ratio Rank: 51
MGC Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
MGC Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	ABFL	MGC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.16	1.38	-0.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.66	1.93	-0.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.25	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.70	1.86	+0.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.25	7.67	+0.58

ABFL vs. MGC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ABFL Sharpe Ratio is 1.16, which is comparable to the MGC Sharpe Ratio of 1.38. 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.

Drawdowns

ABFL vs. MGC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ABFL drawdown since its inception was -34.95%, smaller than the maximum MGC drawdown of -52.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ABFL and MGC.

Drawdown Indicators

	ABFL	MGC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.95%	-52.26%	+17.31%
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	-3.02%	-3.32%	+0.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.95%	-7.15%	+2.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.34%	2.38%	-0.04%

Volatility

ABFL vs. MGC - Volatility Comparison

Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) has a higher volatility of 5.79% compared to Vanguard Mega Cap ETF (MGC) at 3.54%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	ABFL	MGC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.79%	3.54%	+2.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.43%	10.43%	+3.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.68%	13.33%	+3.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.37%	17.40%	-0.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.76%	18.23%	+0.53%

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 0.54%, less than MGC's 0.93% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ABFL Abacus FCF Leaders ETF	0.54%	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	0.93%	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

Can I hold both ABFL and MGC in my portfolio?

ABFL and MGC have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ABFL or MGC?

ABFL has higher volatility (5.79%) compared to MGC (3.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ABFL dropped -34.95% vs MGC's -52.26%.

Which ETF is better, ABFL or MGC?

On 5-year performance, MGC leads with 12.88% vs 11.59% for ABFL. On fees, MGC is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, MGC has been the lower-risk option at 3.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ABFL or MGC?

Over the 5-year period, MGC has performed better with a 12.88% return vs 11.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ABFL or MGC?

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

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ABFL or MGC?

MGC has the higher dividend yield at 0.93%, compared with 0.54% for ABFL.

What is the main difference between ABFL and MGC?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MGC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.38 vs 1.16), 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.