ACLO vs. CGV

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ACLO (TCW AAA CLO ETF) and CGV (Conductor Global Equity Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ACLO is a CLO fund actively managed by TCW, while CGV is a Foreign Small & Mid Cap Equities fund actively managed by Conductor Fund. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, ACLO returned 5.31% vs 29.12% for CGV. At a correlation of -0.11, they often move in opposite directions. ACLO charges 0.20%/yr vs 1.25%/yr for CGV.

Performance

ACLO vs. CGV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TCW AAA CLO ETF (ACLO) and Conductor Global Equity Value ETF (CGV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACLO achieves a 2.21% return, which is significantly lower than CGV's 13.61% return.

ACLO

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.42%
• YTD: 2.21%
• 6M: 2.58%
• 1Y: 5.31%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CGV

• 1D: 0.55%
• 1M: 0.50%
• YTD: 13.61%
• 6M: 15.76%
• 1Y: 29.12%
• 3Y*: 12.96%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ACLO vs. CGV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
ACLO TCW AAA CLO ETF	2.21%	5.32%	0.81%
CGV Conductor Global Equity Value ETF	13.61%	23.11%	-1.52%

Correlation

The correlation between ACLO and CGV is -0.18, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2024	-0.11

Return for Risk

ACLO vs. CGV — Risk / Return Rank

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

ACLO

ACLO Risk / Return Rank: 99
ACLO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
ACLO Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
ACLO Omega Ratio Rank: 99
ACLO Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
ACLO Martin Ratio Rank: 99

CGV

CGV Risk / Return Rank: 56
CGV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
CGV Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
CGV Omega Ratio Rank: 60
CGV Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
CGV Martin Ratio Rank: 54

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.

ACLO vs. CGV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TCW AAA CLO ETF (ACLO) and Conductor Global Equity Value ETF (CGV). 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.

	ACLO	CGV	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	7.29	2.09	+5.20
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	14.85	2.78	+12.07
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	3.41	1.37	+2.03
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	19.90	2.56	+17.34
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	164.37	9.40	+154.97
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ACLO vs. CGV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACLO Sharpe Ratio is 7.29, which is higher than the CGV Sharpe Ratio of 2.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACLO and CGV, 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

	ACLO	CGV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.29	2.09	+5.20
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	5.10	0.80	+4.30

Drawdowns

ACLO vs. CGV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACLO drawdown since its inception was -1.01%, smaller than the maximum CGV drawdown of -16.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACLO and CGV.

Drawdown Indicators

	ACLO	CGV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.01%	-16.64%	+15.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.27%	-12.13%	+11.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.64%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-2.36%	+2.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.05%	-3.65%	+3.60%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.03%	3.30%	-3.27%

Volatility

ACLO vs. CGV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for TCW AAA CLO ETF (ACLO) is 0.14%, while Conductor Global Equity Value ETF (CGV) has a volatility of 5.06%. This indicates that ACLO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CGV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ACLO	CGV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.14%	5.06%	-4.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.57%	11.55%	-10.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.73%	14.06%	-13.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.08%	13.52%	-12.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.08%	13.52%	-12.44%

ACLO vs. CGV - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACLO has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than CGV's 1.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

ACLO vs. CGV - Dividend Comparison

ACLO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.91%, more than CGV's 4.83% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
ACLO TCW AAA CLO ETF	4.91%	4.87%	0.59%	0.00%	0.00%
CGV Conductor Global Equity Value ETF	4.83%	4.58%	2.87%	4.56%	0.71%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ACLO and CGV in my portfolio?

ACLO and CGV have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ACLO or CGV?

CGV has higher volatility (5.06%) compared to ACLO (0.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACLO dropped -1.01% vs CGV's -16.64%.

Which ETF is better, ACLO or CGV?

On 1-year performance, CGV leads with 29.12% vs 5.31% for ACLO. On fees, ACLO is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, ACLO has been the lower-risk option at 0.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ACLO or CGV?

Over the 1-year period, CGV has performed better with a 29.12% return vs 5.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ACLO or CGV?

ACLO is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for CGV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ACLO or CGV?

ACLO has the higher dividend yield at 4.91%, compared with 4.83% for CGV.

What is the main difference between ACLO and CGV?

ACLO is categorized as CLO, while CGV is Foreign Small & Mid Cap Equities. They also come from different issuers: TCW and Conductor Fund. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for ACLO and 1.25% for CGV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ACLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (7.29 vs 2.09), 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.